Yerram Rajasekhar Reddy vs The State of Telangana Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR — CRLP/5075/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS on 07th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HBHC010212122026

Filing Number

CRLP/5874/2026

Filing Date

02-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRLP/5075/2026

Registration Date

06-Apr-2026

Judge

J Sreenivas Rao

Coram

J Sreenivas Rao

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRLP ( 41 )

Sub-Category

U/s.482 Cr.p.c Other offences not covered(Misc.) ( 75 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL Section

Decision Date

07-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS

Last updated 19-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Yerram Rajasekhar Reddy

    Adv. S A V RATNAM

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Telangana Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

  2. 2.Sri. Hariveer

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Apr-2026

    J Sreenivas RaoView PDF

    Summary The Telangana High Court quashed the cognizance order passed by the Magistrate in Criminal Case No. 588/2023 for alleged offences under IPC Sections 120-B and 420, finding that the Magistrate took cognizance without applying his mind and without assigning any reasons. The Court held that taking cognizance requires the Magistrate to judiciously consider whether the allegations constitute a prima facie case, relying on the Supreme Court principle in *Sunil Bharati Mittal v. CBI*, and allowed the Magistrate to retake cognizance afresh with proper reasoning. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-Apr-2026

    For Admission

    J Sreenivas Rao

  4. 02-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRLP/5075/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Telangana High Court quashed the cognizance order passed by the Magistrate in Criminal Case No. 588/2023 for alleged offences under IPC Sections 120-B and 420, finding that the Magistrate took cognizance without applying his mind and without assigning any reasons. The Court held that taking cognizance requires the Magistrate to judiciously consider whether the allegations constitute a prima facie case, relying on the Supreme Court principle in *Sunil Bharati Mittal v. CBI*, and allowed the Magistrate to retake cognizance afresh with proper reasoning. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case