Hi Friends and Experts,
1> I have received a Stay Order from High Court for Accused A4 and A5 this two accused are living in abroad, my wife filed 498A, 354 34 Ipc sections on seven members of family.
2> Later, DVC filed by wife on A1, A2, A3, A6, A7, (In charge sheet IO as written and clearly mentioned A4 and A5 are absconded and if they come to India IO will be arresting A4 & A5 and submitting a additional charge sheet on them to the court.
3> Now, I approached High Court for stay for A4 & A5.
1) Can you please explain me clearly whether this stay order is for only A4 & A5 or complete on accused Seven members?
2) Up to what extend this stay is for?
3) whether this stay is for only 498A or for both 498A and DVC cases?
Now my brother and sister want to come India, are they free to come at this moment after going through this stay order
Copies are directed by High Court to Station officer and Sessions court one for wife and two cc for PP.
Stay Order is below mentioned, please friends and experts go through this petition stay order and let me know your valuable suggestions.
(SHOW CAUSE NOTICE BEFORE ADMISSION)
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD
FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[/b]
PRESENT: THE HONOBLE SRI JUSTICE : XXX
CRIMINAL PETITION:9000 OF 2015
Between:
1. Smt. Lavanya, w/o Gopi Krishna, United Kindom
2. Ashok Kumar s/o Ramana, R/o Presently staying at Phoenix, USA
(Petitioners 1& 2 are rep by through their as General Power of Attorney holder Ramana, S/O Nanda Kishore, R/O Hno: HYderabad
..........Petitioners/Accused nos A4 & A5
AND
1. The State of Telangana, rep by its public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicture at Hyderabad, for the state of Telangana & the State of Andhra Pradesh
2. Ch.Sandhya, W/o Gopi Krishna@Gopal, R/o H.No, 4-63 Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad
.......Respondents
Whereas Petitioners above named through their Advocate Sri A.Raghavendra Rao presented this petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in S.C. No. 143 of 2014 on the I Additional Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District.
And Whereas the High Court, upon perusing the petition and memo of grounds filed herein, and upon hearing the arguments of Sri A. Ragharavendra Rao, Advocate for the Petitioner, and of the Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of Respondent No.1, directed issue of notice to Respondent No.2 herein returnable in two weeks to show cause why this Crl.P., should not be admitted.
You viz:
Ch. Sandhya, W/o Gopi Krishna @ Gopal. R/o Dilsukhnagar Hyderabad
are directed to show cause as to why in the circumstances set out in this petition (copy enclosed) this criminal petition should not be admitted.
Crl.P.MP.No.3146 of 2015: Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying that in the circumstances stated in the memo of grounds filed in the Crl.P., the High Court may be pleased to stay all the further proceedings in S.C.No.143 of 2014 on the file of I Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, including execution of N.B.W's, pending disposal of CRPL No. 3146of 2015 of 2015 on the file of the High Court.
The Court made the following
ORDER:
Notice before admission to second respondent returnable in two weeks.
Petitioners are permitted to take out personal notice on respondent No.2.
There shall be interim stay as prayed for.
