Dismissed

Mende Bejamma v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC15 Feb 2024CRLP/1786/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a Criminal Petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash Domestic Violence proceedings, relying on precedent that appeals under Section 29 of the Domestic Violence Act are the efficacious remedy. However, the appearance of respondents in the lower court was dispensed with.

What did the court decide?

Petition under Section 482 CrPC dismissed. Appearance of petitionersNos.2 to 6/Respondents 2 to 6 in case No. 56 of 2023 dispensed with.

Mende Bejamma Vs The State of Telangana — Domestic Violence | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁸⁵¹

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF^FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND^TWENTYFOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE^{K. SUJANA}

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1786^{OF 2024}

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mende Bejamma, Wo. Rajam, Aged 33^{yrs., Occu.Agriculture.}

¶9

Mende Rajam, S/o. Ramanaiah, Aged 60^{yrs., Occu.Agriculture.}

¶10

Mende Uma, D/o. Rajam, Age 22 Yrs.

¶11

Petitioners No.1 to 3 R/o. H.No. 1-43l1,^{Vempalli, VenkatraopetVil.' Mallapur}

¶12

Mandal, Jagtial District.

¶13

Katherapaka Gangu, Wo. Late Gangdhar,^{RikalVil. and Mandal, jagtial} District.

¶14

Bommena Sayamma, Wo. Ashaiah,^{R/o. MaithapurVil., RaikalMandal,} Jagtial District.

¶15

...Petitioner/Respondent Nos.2 to⁶

¶16

AND

¶17

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its^{Public Prosecutor,Hrgh Court at} Hyderabad.

¶18

Smt. Mende Sai Ramana @ Marampalli^{Sai Ramana,Wo MendeAshok,} Aged 19 yrs., Occu. Student, R/o. H.No.^1-43lt ,^VempallyVil ,^Mallapur Mandal, Jagtial District. Now residing at^{H.No6-73,Clo. MarampeHi Beiaiah,} Market Area Village, Raikal Mandal, Jagtial^District.

¶19

...Respondents

¶20

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^{praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Crimrnal^{Petition,the HighCourt may be} pleased to call for the records and quash the DVC No. 56 of 2023 on the^{file ofI} Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Jagttal;

¶21

l.A. NO: 2OF 2024

¶22

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 of all further proceedings including appearance of the^{petitionersin} DVC No. 56 of 2023 on the file of I Additional Judicral^{FirstClass Magistrateat} Jagtial, pending disposal of the^{quash proceedings.}

¶23

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar peritio*n 1d upon h;;;g ih" Jrguments of sri Venkat Reddy Kodumury, Advocate for the petitioner, Assisltant pu-bric prosecutor, on oet "ti ot the Respondent No.1 and of None Appeared for the Respondent No.2

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE^{K. SUJAITA}

¶26

CRIMINAL PETITI^{ON lto.1786 of2O24}

¶27

ORDER

¶28

This Criminal Petition^{is frled under Section 482 of the Code of} criminal Procedure,^{1973 (for short 'cr.P.c.')by the petitioners/respondent} Nos.2to6toquashtheproceedingsagainsttherninD.V.C.No.56of2023 pending on the irle of I Additional^{JudicialFirstclass Magistrate, Jagtial.}

¶29

Heard the learned counsel^{for the petitioners and the learnedAssistant} Public Prosecutor for respondent^No.1 -^{State. Perusedthe record'}

¶30

In the light of the^{judgmentin Gaddanneedi Nalgo:tIa.rniu' Statc oJ} Telanganat a^{petition to quashthe proceedingsin Domestic ViolenceCase} is not maintainable, as^{section29 of the Protectionof women from Dornestic} Violence Act, 20o5 affords an^{ellicacious remedy by way of an appeal against} the act of the Court below^{in takingcognizanceand numbering the D V'C'}

¶31

In view of the above, the^{petitioners are at liberty to avail the said} alternative remedY.

¶32

5.However,inviewoftherequestmadebythelearnedcounselforthe petitioners, the appearance of^{the petitionerNos'2to 6 herein / respondent} Nos.2 to 6 in D.V.C.No.56^{of 2023 pending on the file of I AdditionalJudicial} First Class Magistrate,^{Jagtial, is dispensed with, cxcept on the dates} whenever their^{presenceis requiredby the trial Court, and they shall be}

¶33

'^20r s^{(2) ALD (cRL.) 764}

¶34

¶35

represented by their cour this order gets vacated #;#

¶36

date of hearing and in case of defaurr,

¶37

Accordingly, the Criminal petition is dismissed.

¶38

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, sha.ll atso stand closed. Sd/. P. PADMANABHA REODY ASSISTANT REGIST/AR

¶39

//TRUE COPY//

¶40

hN/\J SECTION OFFICER

¶41

To,

¶42

The I Additional Judiciat First Class Magistrate at Jagtial.

¶43

2 Two ccs to^pUBLrc pRosECUToR, Hign court for ihe state of rerangana, Hyderabad lOUTl

¶44

One CC to SRt. VENKAT REDDY KODUMURY Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Two CD CD Copies

¶45

Two CD Two CD CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1510212024

ORDER

1 $E, S T4 r€
f, 7
10 APH 2U{ c)
t
*
,
OS S PATC :,

¶52

CRLP.No.1786 of 2024

¶53

DISMISSING CRIMINAL PETITION

¶54

@tr"g I^co \tP

Mende Bejamma v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mende Bejamma 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

Syed Ahamed Vs The State of Telangana

Gudem Vikram Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Guntupalli Padmaja Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Hamza Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Aslam Vs The State of Telangana

Ifatunnisa Vs The State of Telangana