Allowed

Mummanna (Gandham ) Jhansi Rani v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC20 Dec 2022CRLP/8839/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal petition filed by a de facto complainant studying in the USA who was unable to appear for trial. The petitioner sought to be examined via video conference but faced dismissal. This interim order allowed the application subject to a specific appearance date.

What did the court decide?

Criminal petition allowed; order dated 07.11.2022 set aside to permit virtual examination, subject to appearance on 24.01.2023.

Mummanna (Gandham ) Jhansi Rani Vs the… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO Crl.P.No.8839 of 2022

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

The petitioner is de facto complainant in D.V.C.No.11 of 2020 on the file of the III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam District. When the matter came up for trial, the petitioner moved an application for being examined through video conference. This application bearing I.A.No.2500 of 2022 was dismissed by the trial Court. Thereafter, the matter was posted for her appearance and her appearance was eschewed on 07.11.2022. Aggrieved by the order dated 07.11.2022, the petitioner has approached this court with the present criminal petition.

¶4

Smt. P. Vijaya Kumari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is presently studying in the United States of America and was unable to appear before this Court. In fact, she has moved an application for examining her in virtual conference because of her inability to come back to India. Smt. Vijaya Kumari would also submit that the petitioner would arrive India on 20.01.2022 and will be able to give her evidence on 24.12.2022. Her appearance may be dispensed with up to 24.12.2022 because she would not be able to appear earlier.

¶5

Sri T. Nagarjuna Reddy, appearing for respondents 2 to 7, would submit that the petitioner has been insisting on the entire case being tried in accordance with her whims and fancies. He submits that the

¶6

RRR,J 2 Crl.P.No.8839 of 2022

¶7

petitioner had initially moved an application for being represented by her father and the same was dismissed and the stay application was returned, questing which she filed Crl.P.No.3350 of 2022 which is pending. Subsequently, she moved an application for being examined by way of virtual conference and that said petition was also dismissed. He submits that this is the third attempt of the petitioner in trying to delay the matter.

¶8

It is always better that such matters are disposed of on merits rather than technicalities. Further it must also be remembered that such matters cannot be kept on hold indefinitely.

¶9

Balancing these two factors this criminal petition is allowed setting aside the order dated 07.11.2022, subject to the condition of the petitioner appearing before the trial Court on 24.01.2023 for being examined and making herself available for further examination. Failure to appear on 24.101.23 shall result in the order dated 07.11.2022 of the trial Court being revived.

¶10

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶11

20^th December, 2022 Js.

¶12

_________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.

¶13

RRR,J 3 Crl.P.No.8839 of 2022

¶14

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶15

Crl.P.No.8839 of 2022

¶16

20^th December, 2022

¶17

Js.

Mummanna (Gandham ) Jhansi Rani v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mummanna (Gandham ) Jhansi Rani v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chakali Gokari Vs the State of Ap

Taragalla Srinivasarao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

MadakamVenkateswaraRao, Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Seeram Pavan Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Pikkili Valmiki Rama Subbammaa Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Yadavali Umapathi Naidu at Umapath Naidu Vs the Satate of Andhra Pradesh