Partly allowed

Bhukya Ameena v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC24 Apr 2023CRLP/8085/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail and quashing petition under Sections 438, 482 Cr.P.C and 41-A Cr.P.C regarding offences under Section 498-A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act, the High Court declined quashing of FIR but directed police to conclude investigation without coercive steps following judicial guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Police directed to conclude investigation without coercive steps; petition disposed of.

Bhukya Ameena Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²⁵¹ 1

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶3

MONDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8085 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

'1. Bhukya Ameena, W/o Kishan, Aged about 40 years, Occ.Housewife, Rl/o H.No. 5-7412, Garjanpalle, Yellareddipet, Rajanna Siricilla District.

¶9

Bhukya Kishan, S/o Sarya, Aged about 45 years, Occ.Agriculture, Fl/o H.No. 5-7 412, Gaianpalle, Yellareddipet, Rajannd Siricilla District

¶10

Gugulothu Thirupathi, S/o G.Vajra, Aged about 33 years, Occ.Agriculture, Rl/o H.N0.2-071l85, KVM School, Suraram Village, Quthbullapur Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶11

Gugulothu Rajendhar, S/o G.Vajra, Aged about 31 years, Occ.Agriculture, Rl/o H.N0.2-071l85, KVM School, Suraram Village, Quthbullapur Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶12

...PET|TTONERyACCUSED(S)

¶13

AND

¶14

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature, at Hyderabad. Through SHO, Rudrangi, Raianna Siricilla Dist.

¶15

Gugulothu Mamatha, D/o Gajan, Aged about 20 years, Occ. Pvt. Employee, Rl/o Chinthamani Thanda Village, Rudrangi Mandal, Rajanna Siricilla District.

¶16

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS

¶17

Petition under Section 437143814391482 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 FIR No. 40 OF 2022 on the file of Rudraram, Rajanna Siricilla District for the offences u/s 498-4 of IPC & Sec. 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioners /Accused 2 to 4

¶18

l.A. NO: 'l OF 2022

¶19

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 including arrest / appearance of the petitioners I A2 lo 44 in pursuance of FIR No. 40 OF 2022 on the file of Rudraram, Rajanna Siricilla District,^pending disposal of the main Crl.P

¶20

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri J K RANJIT KUMAR ,Advocate for the Petitioner and the public prosecutor (TG/Ap) on behatf of the Respondent No.1

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

¶23

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL PETITION No.8O85 of 20.22

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in FIR No.40 of 2022 on the Iile of Rudrangi Police, Rajanna Siricilla District, for the oflences under Sections 498-A of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act

¶26

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for 1"r respondent.

¶28

The 2"d respondent fi1cd complaint alleging harassment by the husband/Al and petitioners herein who are relatives ol the husband. Since the complaint is outcome of differences between the spouses, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the police conclude investigation in FIR No.4O of 2022 witinout taking coercive steps against the petitioners by following the procedure laid down under Section 41-A Cr.P.C and also the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh

¶29

Kumar a. State o;f Biharl scrupulously. The petitioners shall coopcrate u,ith the Investigatinu Offrcer by furnishing information and documents as sought by them in concluding the investigation

¶30

Accordinqlv, the Criminal Petition is disposed off. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, sl-rall stand closed Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed

¶31

Sd/. K. AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

'1. The Judicial Magistrate of First class at vemulawada, Rajanna siricilla Dist.

¶37

The SHO, Rudrangi PS, Rudrangi, Rajanna Siricilla Dist.

¶38

One CC to SRl. J K RANJTT KUMAR Advocate tOpUCl

¶39

Two CCs to SRl. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (TG) Advocate [OUT]

9,Two CD Copies

?nra,

I (20 t4) 8 scc 273

HIGH COURT DATED:2410412023

¶44

CRLP.No.8085 o12022

¶45

!;l /i I .- r:) :-..
(a_)
T\tI NTI
t\t
,i
,/

¶46

DISPOSSED OFF

¶47

oa-c^ ,
a\s
,-r.

Bhukya Ameena v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhukya Ameena v. The State of Telangana

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

Uke Nagamma And 6 Others Vs The State of Telangana And 8 Others

Vejendla Veera Shivaji Vs State of Telengana and another

Zenath Sajida Vs The State of Telangana

Madasu Srinivas and 2 others Vs The State of Telangana and another

Nasarullah Khan , Aslam Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Azam Shah Syed Mohammed Shah Haleem Sh Mir Vs The State of Telangana