Dismissed

Nasarullah Khan , Aslam v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC24 Apr 2023CRLP/8394/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition for quashing criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in matrimonial dispute. Court held allegations involve triable issues; petition to quash dismissed. Attendance of petitioners dispensed with subject to conditions. Criminal Petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C.No.401 of 2017 will not be quashed. Attendance of petitioners dispensed with subject to filing affidavit and conditional appearance before Magistrate.

Nasarullah Khan , Aslam Vs The State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

.^{,,4i.F ri,n'-fi} ' -,:.,! ; .,, ll . '. ',]

¶2

¶3

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the l\rlemorandum of .^.' t. ' ,Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri C.SHARAry lIl]j.l,; . REDDYI Advocate for the Petitioners and of the Additiohal. Public Prosecdtor foi: '^{., ,} ril ' ; ;.^{'the;fitqie,ot fetangbnaon behalfof'the Respondent.j,NojlhhdlNbpqAppearedfoi:} the Relpondent No.2. ,

¶4

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶5

,(.t lj,
ritir*"I:I'
..t ,:
'1,.
,;.;,.I..1', , ,, ,.. , . ,....,:,'.r- | -.i ,.r..1,1 ,,,,!t ".r1 i I 'i.! ;..,'ii I 1.r i , ,, i",' : i: ' ;i;il J.,',,'1!i : . i '.t
' ,l lii i' .';
i
,:l .t'
:iil r.l ..
:i'r,
| ,,i J'h;.rr i,. ..'' i. .r irt'li
liil;r.r r; riir rij,.i-.i. .t.t,? ll t.'j.I 'liv - , ,1, '. ,t:,.i ) I' 'in: l t i :,1 ri , 1i'1 rl ., iri ,
il'fn t;:i i . ',: :
l'
''1) i :,,,tll
ir). n
:,i .i r: li
'.11 , .i. +:l
fltEl'..: '..1i,, ;,1 i,
. j 'lir' il.,-r,if
,.i l;i
" ,(,
{;
.l
lr
r''!11f.' . ;, .. :: , Lt'
iii'l; '?,iJl:,1.!i i' ,' ,t'r] '| . .' I r,i i' rj,,.;,,'' .lr !
;, ' ,,1,.i.'t.'. 1i rj,j
,t I
f.
:
ri l'^
2
.1. '; i i'. t' ,.'.1
-. -, ,-ir-,-A-- a---.r,--L.--]. it,
-!

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL PETITION No. 8394 of 2022

¶7

ORDER:

¶8

l. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short^.Cr.p.C.,) by the petitioners/Accused Nos.4 to A8 to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.40 1 ot 2Ol7 on the hle of XIII Additional Chief Mctropolital Magistrate, Hyderabad for the offences under Sections 498-A. and 406 of IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petilioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the 1"t respondent - State. Perused the record.

¶10

A perusal of record would reveal ttrat, the marriage of 2"a respondent with the Al was performed on O9.O7.2O04 and thereafter matrimonial disputes arose between them.

¶11

The allegations ieveled against petitioners herein are triable issues. The petitioners herein have to face trial and prove their innocence. In view of the same, this Court is not

Hf =.1n#F

inclined to quash the proceedings in^C.C.No.4O1 ol^{2Ol7 on} the lile of XIII Additional Chiel Metropolitan^Magistrate, Hyderabad against the petitioners herein.^However,in matrimonial disputes the identiflrcation ol^{parties is not in} dispute.

¶16

In view of the above reasons,^{the attendance of the} petitioners/A4 to A8 is dispensed with in C.C.No.4O I ot^2OI7 on the file of XIII Additional Chief^{Metropolitan Magistrate,} Hyderabad, when represented by their^{counselon record, the} attendance of the petitioners is dispensed^{subject to hling an} affrdavit by the petitioners stating^{that in their absencethe} proceedings conducted by their counsel wili not^{be disputed by} them in arry manner and also^{they shall not dispute their} identity. However, the petitioners shall^{appear before the} learned Magistrate as and when their^{presence is required' In} the event of the petitioners' failure^{to appear when the Court} directs, this order dispensing^{their attendance wouldstand} cancelled.

¶17

¶18

¶19

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed off

¶20

Needless to say, in the event of the petitioners hling an application under Section 239 of Cr.P.C. seeking discharge, if charges are not framcd, the concerned Court shall dispose it off on merits.

¶21

Miscellaaeous applications pending, if any, shall stald

¶22

closed

¶23

;..: Sd/-V.KAVITHA
- ,.:( ,
AS$ISTANT REGISiTRAB' :
',.. : l;.,;rilA,i^1,, 1 . i
, ,.i1., ti ,l! //TRUE C:APYll ':i i!;.: t,l l.x$ I Wt 4a,<=--
/ --lt
i":i,',1''. ,' ::''SEdr'rbti oFFlcER.
To
1
..i
2
3 il:ili,$ff ffi n3{"i.t"strd;#ds:iHiilii.t,'#}n'#,.ai,:
Hvderabad (OUT)
-c. Srt"run Reddv, Advcicate [oPU c]
A#""#il $
Two CD CoPies ,,,lI )r
lil,
li,
-:li
'
.l . ;,, ,
i 1: lr i.<br>i .,,:
. ,i'..,,
;.rr.lr::jr
.,1..1 : ''
't. .i
+J j! 'i' ,,,': ," irr. ' :' " ' :' '!. :i | )llt '
.rqi I . . . ., , i ,] ,i,
,i, r' ,.!t?t
.i'1,. i;:::'i " ".' 'ii'
. .r,,i:
i rj :ii;:..;i..,-l-il.,i,., " :,
mh

¶24

HIGH COURT

¶25

DATED:2410412023

¶26

S r*ir:
(:'
t
-i:ili
I
..
".,i'1 ,i i
03 Jll'r zUl
JUDGMENT
CR|-P.No:S3S+ of 2o22
j..
i. l , tr.:-. 1 ,-Y
l: :'r r: : I
i.
'i't..,-
t.ti I rt
ill i,1.

¶27

DISPOSING OF THE CRL.P.
(n
t L)
LL v
!..Lr -.--l- -:.!:rt-i- ,. , -. --. :. .,. :

Nasarullah Khan , Aslam v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nasarullah Khan , Aslam 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

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

Bhukya Ameena Vs The State of Telangana

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