Disposed

Sowmya v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC22 Jun 2023CRLP/9510/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of Domestic Violence proceedings. The Court held that quashing is not maintainable due to alternative remedy and directed dispensation with personal appearance pending trial.

What did the court decide?

Dispensation with personal appearance of petitioners and respondents No. 1 and 4 in D.V.C. No. 24 of 2022.

Sowmya Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

13254 |

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

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

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE G.ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITIO NO: 9510 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

Sowmya, Wo. Syed Riyaz, age 33 years, Occ ; House wife, R/o. H.No. 1-25, Brundhavan Colony, Malkajgiri.

¶9

Syed Riyaz, S/o. Syed Yousuf, age. 42 years, Occ ; Business, PJo Flat No. 1 13, Metro Heights, Nagole, LB Nagar

¶10

3, Vallapu Chandrakala, D/o Late Vallapu Papaiah, age 62 years, Occ. House hold, R/o.H.No.1-25, Brundhavan Colony, Malkajgiri.

¶11

...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1, 2 & 4

¶12

AltD

¶13

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana Through P.S. Malkajgiri, Rachakonda

¶14

Smt Mounika Vallapur, W/o. Vallapu Aklish, Aged 25 years, Occ; housewife, No. 1A-413h4, Mallikarjun Nagar, Malkajgiri, Medchal-Malkajgiri.

¶15

...RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶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 quash the D.V.C.No.24 ot 2022 the file of Hon'ble Addl XVll Metropolitan Magistrate at Malkajgiri, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri now on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge cum Metropolitan Magistrate at Malkaigiri filed on the basis of the complaint of the Defacto Complainant 07.06.2022 against the Petitioners herein.

¶17

I.ANO:I OF 2022

¶18

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 D.V.C. No. 24 of 2022 on the file of Hon'ble Addl XVll Metropolitan Magistrate at Malkajgiri, Cyberabad at Matkajgiri now on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge cum Metropolitan Magistrate at Malkalgiri including the presence of the Petitioners herein.

¶19

This Petiti,ln c,)ming on for hearing, upon petuslng tlle lvlemorandum of Grounds of C.rirrrn ll Petition and upon hearing the argum lntr; of Sri.T.Surya Satish, Advor)at() or the Petitioners and the AdCitionill Public Prosecutor Sri.S.Ganesh, on b rhalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri E.Sh risha, Advocate for the Respo ndent \r>.2.

¶20

The Court made th( following ORDER

¶21

t I

¶22

I I

¶23

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶24

CRIMINAL PETITION No.951O OF 2022

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This Criminal Petition is f-rled under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.J by the petitioners/ respondents No. 1, 2 and 4 to quash the proceedings against them in D.V.C.No.24 of 2022 pending on the frie of learned XVII Metropolitan Magistrate at Malkajgiri, Cyberabad, now on the hle of learned Principal Junior Civil Judge-cumMetropolitan Magistrate at Malkajgiri.

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri S.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent - State and learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the record.

¶28

This Court in Gaddameedi Nagamani u. The State o:f Telangana and Ors.l (Criminal Petition No.22371of 2015), has specifically given a finding that when there is an alternative remedy available, quash petition is not maintainable in Domestic Violence Cases.

¶29

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that truth or otherwise of the allegations made against the petitioners can be decided only after conducting

¶30

'MANU/AP/0394/20t5

¶31

¶32

trial. H.nce. tr-ris cou.t is not inclined tc i,terrr:rc nitri -re proceedings; ;t lainst the pctitioners

¶33

Taking nto consicleration the abovc statcd . u 1gr_rent. this Court cler:n s it appropriate t() dispens< u ith the appeararce,/zr tcn<lance of petitioners No. 1 tncl ,), responrlents No.1 ancl 4 in t.V.C.No.24 of 2022 before rhr lear,e,C Additional XVII Metloptli ae Magistrate at Malkajgiri, Cyt,erzrbz.d nr,rv or.i the hle of Icarnc, I Pr.incipal Junior Civil Judg:_cun, ,,4etropolitan Magistratc at ,{zLlkajgiri, r.rnless thcir presenc( is re<lLrirccl b1 ti_re trial Court for- r r;pecific purpose. No such reli:f is g iven so far as petitioner / re s1: rr,dt:nt No.2 is concerned. Further, trr: pe titioners are at I be -11 [o makc appropriate applir:atior: beiore thc appropriar c frr. rnr.

¶34

6 Accord;n1 [y, the Criminal petition is dispcsed ol. Misc cllrn :ous applications pending, rf any, s;hall stlrnd closed.

¶35

Sd/.T.JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /iTRUE COPY// ( tll siEc't-loN oFFtcER

¶36

To, 1 The Principi | . unior Civil Judge - cum - Metropolitan Mz g ;trale at Malkajgiri

¶37

2 The Station^-louse Officer, Malkajgiri Police Statio r, Rac re <on la. J Two C;C's tc P-rblic Prosercutor, High Court for the Stat€, of felengana at Hyderabad OUT)

¶38

4 One C;C t: ! ri.T.Surya Satish, Advocate [OPUC] 5 Two^(lD e.lp eS

q\€-

HIGH COUIR'T

DATED:221)612023

ORDER

CRLP.No.9510 of 2022

.1€''-.
2<br>lsi\ !r
t
'(i<br>,'/

¶46

DISPOSI\G O^T'fHE CRIMINAI, PETII'ION

¶47

wITIIOI|I C(_ S'tS.

¶48

g
) I n_,
\
E;L

Sowmya v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sowmya 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

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

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

Pallerla Achinthya and another Vs The State of Telangana and another