Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 36950 (AP)

S. MD. KHALID BASHA, RAICHUR v. HANEES FATHIMA, KURNOOL DIST. & 2 OTHRS

CRLRC/375/2015 · 2025-07-20

T Mallikarjuna Rao

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010608402015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3369] MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 375/2015 Between: 1. S. MD. KHALID BASHA, RAICHUR, S/O. S.KHALEEM, KHALIM KIRANA SHOP, NEAR THEEN KANJIL, JAWARGALLI, RAICHUR. ...PETITIONER AND 1. HANEES FATHIMA KURNOOL DIST 2 OTHRS, W/O. S.MD.KHALID BASHA, D/O. TAHER BASHA, MUSLIM, HOUSE WIFE, R/O. H.NO.6/324, THELIWADI, ADONI, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 2. KHALIM BEE, D/O. S.MD.KHALID BASHA, MINOR, REP. BY MOTHER AND GUARDIAN, S.HANEES FATHIMA I.E., 1ST RESPONDENT 3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT AT HYDERABAD. ...RESPONDENT(S): IA NO: 1 OF 2015(CRLRCMP 587 OF 2015 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including execution of the orders dated 10.12.2014 in M.C.No. 8 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Adoni, Kurnool District, pending disposal of the above Crl.R.C. and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K RATHANGA PANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2. S LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO Criminal Revision Case No.375 of 2015 ORDER: In compliance with the order of this Court dated 30.06.2025, the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Kurnool, has submitted a report stating that the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Adoni, had already issued notices to the parties through the Police. However, the notices were returned un-served, as the Police were unable to trace the parties. It is further stated that the learned Magistrate also issued notices to the Advocates who had appeared in the Court below. According to the Advocates, the matter was settled long ago, and the current whereabouts of the parties are not known. 2. It seems that the petitioner is not interested to proceed with the matter. 3. In view of the above, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed for default. No order as to costs. Interim orders granted earlier, if any, shall stand vacated. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO, J Date: 21.07.2025 M K K THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO Criminal Revision Case No.375 of 2015 Date: 21.07.2025 M K K 93 67