This is another judgment from AP High Court which talks about Rule 37 of CRP and CO, 1990.
P.Trivikrama Prasad Vs State Of A.P. on 29 January, 2016 crlp_4854_2015The bulk of the Criminal Rules of Practice, 1990 is available here.
Tag: The Criminal Rules of Practice and Circular Orders 1990 (High Court of A.P.)
T.Vinil SO Srinivasulu Vs State Of A.P. on 22 September, 2015
This is another judgment from AP High Court which talks about Rule 37 of CRP and CO, 1990.
T.Vinil SO Srinivasulu Vs State Of A.P. on 22 September, 2015 crlp_8193_2015The bulk of the Criminal Rules of Practice, 1990 is available here.
The Criminal Rules of Practice and Circular Orders, 1990 (High Court of A.P.)
Here is the 1990 edition of the Criminal Rules of Practice and Circular Orders, 1990 (High Court of A.P.).
THE CRIMINAL RULES OF PRACTICE AND CIRCULAR ORDERS, 1990Four judgments of AP High Court that I could find related to Rule 37, are the following:
- Gadu Narayanarao and Anr Vs State Of A.P. and Anr on 3 June, 2015
- Gaddameedi Nagamani Vs The State Of Telangana on 17 July, 2015
- T.Vinil S/O Srinivasulu Vs State Of A.P. on 22 September, 2015
- P.Trivikrama Prasad Vs State Of A.P. on 29 January, 2016
You can take a look at my 498A case here, where I have used Rule 37 successfully and am filing (absent) petitions via Registered Post – Acknowledge Due to the filing section.
The Amendments made to AP Criminal Rules of Practice and Circular Orders, 1990 are listed below.
2023-02-17 Amendment to CrRP 1990Find the Civil Rules of Practice of AP High Court here.
Gaddameedi Nagamani Vs The State Of Telangana on 17 July, 2015
In this judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, it was held that “the learned Magistrate shall entertain, hear and pass appropriate orders granting the same with necessary conditions” in the petitions contesting the maintainability of 482 CrPC quash in DV Cases.
See Page 5, last para…
Gaddameedi Nagamani Vs The State Of Telangana on 17 July, 2015Needless to say if any appeal is filed by any of the petitioners herein, they can file for the period beyond one month with application invoking Section 14 of the Limitation Act before the learned Sessions Judge to entertain as it is of bonafide prosecution in this Court instead of proceeding by appeal before the Court of Sessions, within the sweep of Section 14 of the Limitation Act. Further, if any application is filed under Rule 37 of Criminal Rules of Practice or under Section 126(2) or Section 205 to represent through special vakalat or through advocate or for one to represent others as the case may be, the learned Magistrate shall entertain, hear and pass appropriate orders granting the same with necessary conditions.
Citations: [2015 SCC ONLINE HYD 293], [2016 CCC 1 49], [2015 ALD CRI 2 764]
Other Sources:
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/110893807/
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5e53212e46571b56b1ea70aa
http://document.manupatra.com/ap/2001-2004/ap2015/AP20151408152002271.htm
The bulk of the Criminal Rules of Practice, 1990 is available here.
