Allowed

Kandavalli Vasundhara v. The State of Telangana and another

Telangana HC20 Feb 2023CRLP/6023/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings against the petitioner for alleged abetment of suicide. The court held that sending abusive messages degrading the deceased woman's character constituted defamation at most, but did not amount to intentional aiding or instigation under Section 306 IPC.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings against the petitioner in PRC No.113 of 2021 were quashed and the Criminal Petition was allowed.

Kandavalli Vasundhara Vs The State of Telangana and another — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32sl ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

IUONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶6

Between:

¶7

Kandavalli Vasundhara, Dlo. Moses, lg".?q years, occ. Nilc R/o. Flat no.302, sai Balaji Enclave, Sreenagar, Gajuvaka, V6arcrafiatnam, visat<rripain"rBi.t.i.t.

¶8

...PETITIONERYACCUSED NO.2

¶9

AND

¶10

1- The State of Telangana, Represented by its Public prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad

¶11

....Respondent No.1/ Respondent

¶12

2- smt. Munirg,qt<g.ogrq Wi9 Muni Venkateswara Rao, Age 52 years, occ. Hoqqey4fe, Rr/o. H. No-. a-424, Atwyn cotony, Miyapui, Seinirgi,ipilrv, ninga Reddy District.

¶13

...RESPONDENT NO.2/COMPLAINANT

¶14

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Peiition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in PRC No.113 of 2021on the file of the leained Vlll Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Kukatpally, Cyberabad and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit.-

¶15

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2022

¶16

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 stay all further proceedings in PRC No. 113 of 1O21 6n the file of tfre learned Vlll Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Kukatpalty, Cyberabad, including appearance of the Petitioner, pending disposal of the main quaih petition.

¶17

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of 56 KOWTURU PAVAN KUMAR, Advocate for the Petitionlr and of the Additional public Prosecutor for the State of Telangana on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and for the Respondent No. None Appeared

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶20

CRIMINAL PETITION No.6O23 OF 2O22

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitionerl{2 in PRC No.113 of 2O2l on the file of VIII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Kukatpally, Cyberabad.

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.Sudershan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the lst respondent - State.

¶24

The 2"a respondent, who is the mother of the deceased, filed a complaint stating that her daughter fell in love with A1. Both of them were talking on regular basis and when it was known that A1 had relationship with another girl, the deceased stopped talking to him. However, A1 admitted that he would not commit such mistake. The complainant further stated that this petitioner, who is the girl friend of A1 started sending messages and insulted the deceased stating that her character was not good. Specifically, the message saying that 'neevu character lenidanivi, enduku nee brathuku,nllwll brathiki .labamu ledu' (you are characterless person and there is no use of your life). According to the

¶25

¶26

investigation, the deceased committed suicide and these messages were two days prior in time to the said suicide.

¶27

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that even admitting that certain messages were sent, it would not fall within the meaning of Section 306 of Ipc. tn support of his contention, he relied on the judgment of this court in the case of P.srinivasulu v. state of Andhra pradeshr. In the said judgment, this court held that mere abuse wil not amount to abetment unless something more has been done in pursuance of the said act of abuse.

¶28

on the other hand, learned Additional public prosecutor appearing for the l"t respondent/state would submit that the petitioner was complicit of sending messages stating that the deceased was a characterless woman and there was no use of continuing with her life. For the said reason of humiliating her, the deceased got vexed and committed suicide.

¶29

under Section 107 of IPC, if any person instigates or engages with one or more persons and intentionally aids, by any act or illegat omission, the doing of such thing amounts to an offence of

¶30

I 2004 Lawsuit (AP) l2l

abetment. In the^{present case,the allegation against this petitioner} is that telephonic messages^{were sent saying that the deceaseddid} not have character and her^{life was useless. Sendingabusive} messages in whatsoever^{mannerwill not alnount to abetment to} commit suicide. At^{most,the said abusivelanguageused to send} messages may amount to an^{offence of defamation. However,} sending such messages will^{not amount to intentional aidinga} person to commit suicide. For the said^{reasons, even accepting the} version of the prosecution that^{abusivemessageswere sent on} phone by this petitioner saying that the^{deceasedwas a} characterless woman, no offence under^{Section306 of IPC is made} out.

¶35

In the result, the proceedings against this^{petitioner/A2in} PRC No.113 of 2021 on the file of VIII Additional^Metropolitan Magistrate at Kukatpally, Cyberabad, are hereby^quashed.

¶36

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶37

Sd/.T.JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /TRUE COPY/ qD SECTION OFFICER

¶38

To 1. The Vltl Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, at Kukatpaly, Cyberabad.

¶39

Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (OUT)

¶40

One CC to Sri KoMuru Pavan Kumar, Advocate [OPUC]

¶41

Two CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:2010212023

1r.E I J4
{,
:- ,
2 3 r'i$.i] ?fi?3 .'

¶47

ORDER

¶48

CRLP.No.6023^{ot 2O22}

¶49

CRL.P. IS ALLOWED.

¶50

q
$d"

Kandavalli Vasundhara v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kandavalli Vasundhara v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Syed Akram Ahmed Vs the State of Telangana

Raghupathi Aakuthota Vs The State of Telangana

Sunkari Kistamma Vs The State of Telangana

Kurra Ramesh Goud Vs The State of Telangana and another

M/s.Blue Dart Express Limited. Vs The State of Telangana

K Govind Raj Vs The State of Telangana