Mondi Sandhya Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

¶1

Date of Pronouncement : 13.07.2026 Date of uploading : 15.07.2026

¶2

APHC010352822026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3504] AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

MONDAY, THE 13^th DAY OF JULY 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5695/2026

¶7

Between:

¶8

MONDI SANDHYA, W/O. PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT. D.NO.50-96-4/7/4, N.E. LAYOUT, SEETHAMMADARA, P T COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM.

¶9

MONDI PRASAD, S/O. JAGANNADHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT.D.NO.50 96-4/7/4, N.E.LAYOUT, SEETHAMMADARA, P TCOLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM.

¶10

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF A.P, AMARAVTHI.

¶13

JOGA ALIAS GIDUTHURI LAVNYA, W/O. GIDUTHURI SRINIVAS, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,RESIDING AT. D.NO.13-32-16, PATEL STREET, BHEEMUNIPATNAM VISAKHAPATNAM.

¶14

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):

¶15

Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Courtpleased to quash the proceedings against the petitioners No1 & 2 (Accused 4&5 Calender Case No. 2709/2022 vide.crime No: 213/2021 on the file of the Addl. Chief Judicial

¶16

::2::

¶17

Magistrate Visakhapatnam, for alleged offence u/s 498 A of Indian Penal Code (IPC) & Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, and pass s

¶18

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶19

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased leased to dispense with filing of the original certified copies of of C.C No. 2709 of 2022 and Crime No. 213 of 2021 under section 498(A) of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of D.P. dated 02.07.2022 and 27.05.2021 on the file of Hon’ble I AddI Chief Judicial Magistrate, Visakhapatnam and Women Visakhapatnam District, respectively and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case Act, 1961 Police Station

¶20

IA NO: 2 OF 2026

¶21

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased eased to stay of all further proceedings in connection with the C.C No. 2709 of 2022 dt. 02.07.2022 and Crime No. 213 of 2021 498(A) of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of D.P. Act, 1961 dated 27.05.2021 disposal of the main Criminal case, including the personal petitioners/A-4 and A-5 and pass

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

¶23

YELLATI NAGA SRINIVAS

¶24

Y N Srinivas

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

¶26

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶27

::3::

¶28

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5695 OF 2026

¶29

The Court made the following

¶30

O R D E R:

¶31

Instant Criminal Petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023, has been filed on behalf of the petitioners herein (A4 and A5), seeking to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.2709 of 2022 on the file of the learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, wherein they were charged for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶32

2. Heard Sri Y.N. Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioners appeared through virtual mode and Sri Nelothpal Ganji, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1-State.

¶33

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners herein are A4 and A5, who are charged for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 .

¶34

4. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners restricted his prayer to the extent of dispensing with the personal appearance of petitioners herein in the C.C. proceedings before the trial Court.

¶35

::4::

¶36

5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are specific allegations against the petitioners herein and as such, he opposed the prayer of the petitioners.

¶37

6. However, considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners coupled with the authoritative dictum held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Geddam Jhansi Vs. State of Telangana¹ , and after perusal of the entire material available on record, the presence of petitioners (A4 and A5) alone before the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam in CC No.2709 of 2022 is hereby dispensed with, except on those dates when the learned Judge feels that their presence is necessary.

¶38

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

¶39