In a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash proceedings against petitioners who were implicated for encouraging domestic violence, the High Court allowed the petition.
Criminal proceedings in C.C. No. 293 of 2013 against petitioners A-3 and A-4 are quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
I
HICH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANCANA AT HYDERABAD
MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI IUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
Criminal Petition No. 5473 of 2015
Between:
AND
Petition under Sectio n 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings gainst the petitioner/A.2 to 4 in C.C.No.293 of 2073 on the file of the XIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad (Mahila) Court, Hyderabad.
I.A. NO: 1OF 2015(CRLPMP. NO: 5496OF 2015)
Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the personal appearince of the petitioenr accused Nos.2 to 4 as direct the trial court to fix the date for trial and fix the time period for disposal of main case in C.C.No.293 of 2013 on the file of XIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Hyderabad (Mahila Court) pending clisposal of the above Crl.P.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(CRLPMP. NO: 3M7 OF 2016)
Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal petition, the. High Court may be pleased to receive the addl. Matetial papers as consider Crl.MP No.4020 of 2075 on tlle file of the XIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and Crl.R.P.No.268 of 2015 on the file of the II Addl. Metropolitan Sessions fudge, Hydearbad may considered as additional documents and quash the proce:edings in the interest of justice.
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Pradeep Kumar.S, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Responrlent No.1 and of Sri E.Sambasiva Pratap, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.
The Court made the following: ORDER
I
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 5473 of 2Ol5
ORDER:
The present Criminal Petition is hled by the petitioners/A-2 to A-4 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.293 of 2013 on the file of the XIll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Mahila) Court, Hyderabad
2
respondent No.2 both physi:ally and .mentally by suspecting her character. The petitioners, who are accused Nos.2 to 4, used to encourage accused No.1 in all these acts and the petitioners/A-2 to A-4 support accused No. 1 and a-lso used to ill treat respondent No.2 and neglected her in all aspects of her life.
J
and A-4 and only for the purpose of acting A-1 to her tune, respondent No.2 has brought the petitioners in to the criminal case.
4
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (lvlahila) Court, Hyderabad are liable to be quashed against the petitioners.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand
ciosed.
S{ITB.CHANDRAPRAKASH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / /TRUEC]PY/ / qD
SECTION OFFICER
To,
CC to the Public Prosecutor,High Court Buldings, Hyderabad [OPL]AICuut)
]CK NS w
'j
HIGH COURT
DATED: 04/09/2023
ORDER
CRLP.No.5473 of 2015
f. g STAIg
.:
o
cr.) 1[ otl tm
t
h* f-ti:1lirh(( .lr
Allowing the Criminal Petition
c"c{ w- (-rt"*
2 issues framed by the court
Whether quashing of criminal proceedings against petitioners/Accused Nos. 2 to 4 is warranted where specific allegations are attributed only to Accused No. 1.
Whether the case against the 1st petitioner having abated due to death requires separate disposition against remaining petitioners A-3 and A-4.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dr. K.Rajeswar Rao
K. Sharada
Dr. Anuradha
The State of Telangana
Dr. Allanki Suneetha Devi
E.V. Venugopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
