Disposed

Mohd. Khan and 9 others v. The State of Telangana and another

Telangana HC22 Jun 2023CRLP/8158/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking quashing of proceedings for offenses under IPC 498-A, 406, 506 and Dowry Prohibition Act, the Court refused to quash the case, holding truth must be decided via trial, but dispensed with attendance of omnibus accused except for Section 313 and judgment.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings not quashed; determination reserved for trial. Attendance and appearance of accused nos. 3 to 12 dispensed with unless required for Section 313 Cr.P.C. or judgment pronouncement.

Mohd. Khan and 9 others Vs The State of Telangana and… — Domestic Violence | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

132s41

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE G.ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8158 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mohd. Khan, S/o. Late Mohd. lsmail Khan, Aged about 65^years, Occ. Business, Rt/o. H.No. 14-5-32, Goutam Model School, Baidwadi, Begumbazar, Hyderabad.^(A-3)

¶9

Mohd- Khaja Moinuddin Khan, S/o. Mohd. Khan, aged about 38 years, Occ. Business, R:/o. H.No. 14-5-32, Goutam Model School, Baidwadi, Begumbazar, Hyderabad. (A-4)

¶10

Smt.Tabassum Begum, Wo. Mohd. Khaja lr4oinuddin Khan, Aged about 26^years, Occ. Household, R/o. H.No. 14-5-32, Goutam Model School, Baidwadi, Begumbazar, Hyderabad. (A-5)

¶11

hmt.Zeenath Begum, Wo. tvlohd. Ilyas Khan, Aged about 28^years, Occ. Household, Fl/o. H.No. 14-5-32, Goutam Model School, Baidwadi, Begumbazar, Hyderabad.^(A- 6)

¶12

Smt.Mohd. llyas Khan, S/o. Late Alhaj Faizullah Khan, Aged about 34 years, Occ. Business, Rr/o. H.No. 14-5-32, Goutam Model School. Baidwadi, Begumbazar, Hyderabad. (A-7)

¶13

Smt.Saleha Begum, Wo. Ali Bin Ahmed, Aged about 30^years, Occ: household, RVo. H.No. 14-5-32, Goutam Model School, Baidwadi, Begumbazar, Hyderabad.^(A-8)

¶14

Smt.Safiya Begum, Wo. Shaik Sharif @ Abdul Ashraf, Aged aboul 27 years, Occ. Household, Rr/o. H.No. 14-5-32, Goutam Model School, Baidwadi, Begumbazar, Hyderabad. (A-9)

¶15

Shaik Shanrif @ Abdul Ashraf, S/o. Shaik Abdul Aziz, aged about 30 years, Occ. Business, Rr/o. H.No. 14-5-32, Goutam Model School, Baidwadi, Begumbazar, Hyderabad. (A-10)

¶16

Smt. Sayeeda Begum, Wo. Mohd. Afroz Khan, Aged about 26^years, Occ. Household, Rl/o. H.No. 14-5-32, Goutam Model School, Baidwadi,^Begumbazar, Hyderabad. (A-1 1)

¶17

Mohd. Afroz, S/o. Mohd. Faiz Khan, Aged about 33^years, Occ. Business, Rlio. H.No. 14-5-32, Goutam Model School, Baidwadi, Begumbazar, Hyderabad.^(A-12)

¶18

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶19

AND

¶20

The State of Telangana, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana. At Hyderabad

¶21

Smt.Nazia Banu, Wo. Mohd. Zubair, D/o. Late Shaik Babar, aged about 28^years, Occ- Household, Rl/o. H.no. 19-3-6771N5, Misrigunj, Hyderabad.

¶22

,..RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT

¶23

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 quash the proceedings in C.C.No. 2489 ol 2022 on the file of the XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad against the petitioner, in the interest of Justice.

¶24

LA. NO: 1 OF 2022

¶25

Petilion under Section 482 of Cr. P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the lt4emorandurn of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further. proceedings including the appearance of the petitioners in C.C.No. 2489 of 2022 on the file of the XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad, pending disposal of the quashing petition before this Hon'ble High Court.

¶26

l.A. NO: 1OF 2023

¶27

Petition under Secticn 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 extend the interim stay order granted in l.A.No 1 of 2O22 in Crl.P.No. 8158 ot 2022, dt.13.O9.2022, pending disposal of the above Crl.P.

¶28

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri A HARIPRASAD REDDY, Advocate for the Petitioner and the SRI S GANESH, Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State /yf Telangana on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and None Appeared for the Respondent No.2

¶29

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶30

¶31

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶32

CRIMINAL PETITION No.8158 of 2022

¶33

ORDER:

¶34

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of th-e Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the petitioners/ accused Nos.3 to 12 to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.2489 of 2O2O pending on the file of learned XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, registered for the offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 506 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 & 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶35

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S. Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No.l- State. Perused the record.

¶36

Initially, on 13.09.2022, this Court has granted stay of all further proceedings in C.C.No.2489 of 2O2O pending on the file of learned XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad t1ll 29. I 1.2022.

¶37

It is the specific contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that accused Nos.3 to 12 are falsely implicated in the case and there are omnibus allegations

¶38

¶39

¶40

against the petitioners. Therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings against them.

¶41

On a perusal of the charge sheet, this Court is of the view that truth or otherwise of the allegations made against the petitioners can be decided only after conducting trial. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the proceedings against the petitioners

¶42

Taking into consideration that though specific allegations are made against accused Nos.l and 2 and only omnibus allegations are made against accused Nos.3 to 12, the appearance/attendance of accused Nos.3 to 12 before the learned XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, in C.C.No.24B9 of 2O2O is dispensed with, unless their presence is required by the trial Court for a specific purpose or at the time of recording their examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and on the date of pronouncement of judgment.

¶43

7 . Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Needless to say, in the event of the petitioners filing an application seeking discharge, if the charges are not yet framed, the concerned Court shall dispose of the same on

¶44

¶45

merits within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of filing of the said application, after hearing arguments on both sides.

¶46

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶47

¶48

//TRUE COPY//

¶49

SD/.C.PRAVEEN KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR tJ}l

¶50

SECTION OFFICER

¶51

To, 1. The XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad 2. The Station House Officer, Women Police Station, South Zone,Hyderabad .city 3. rTwo CCs to Sri S GANESH, Assistant Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (OUT) 4. One CC to SRl. A HARIPRASAD REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] u) Two CD Copies pr ot

HlGH COURT

DATED: 2210612023

ORDER

1ll E STA Ia
!
lo I
3 0 JUil ?1123
"_
* , ii) ,'I
ct;spr" a

¶57

CRLP.No.8158 of 2022

¶58

DISPOSING OFF THE CRL.P

¶59

r-<
e

Mohd. Khan and 9 others v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Khan and 9 others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Billa Radhakishan Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Taj Vs The State of Telangana

Afia Rasheed Khan Vs State of Telangana

Chettikindi Ashok and 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana and Another

Pallerla Achinthya and another Vs The State of Telangana and another

Sowmya Vs The State of Telangana