Disposed

Smt.Chennam Setti Bhavya Shree @ Pippala Bhavya Shree v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC21 Aug 2025CRLP/10287/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Wife accused of trespass and related offences sought quashing of proceedings, alleging she visited the matrimonial home only to negotiate settlement. Court found witness statements raised allegations fit for trial, declined to interfere, directed expeditious trial and dispensed with her personal attendance.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings not quashed; trial court directed to dispose C.C.No.1 of 2024 at the earliest; petitioner's personal attendance dispensed with, counsel must appear on every date.

Smt.Chennam Setti Bhavya Shree @ Pippala Bhavya Shree Vs… — Dowry and Cruelty | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY,THE TWENry FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA^{DEVI EADA}

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10287 OF 2025

¶6

Between:

¶7

Smt.Chennam Setti Bhavya Shree @^{Pippala Bhavya Shree, Wo Pippala} Manikanta Ajay Aged 28 years, Occ.^{Housewife R/o. H.No 48-261' Flat no.} 701-B RidgeT6wei, Opp. Ganesh Nagar Bus Stop^{Suryanagar,Chintal, Bala} Nagar Township Rangareddy District.

¶8

...Petitioner/Accused No.1

¶9

AND

¶10

'1 . The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Judicature for State of Telangana At Hyderabad.

¶11

Sri. Pippala Manikanta Aiay, D/o.^{PVS SathyanarayanaMurthyAged. 29} years,'Occ. Software Enlineer R/o. H.No. 13-258119, SaiKrupa^Colony Santoshimatha Temple Street, Beeramguda^{Ammenpur,Sangareddy.}

¶12

...Respondents/De-facto^Complainant

¶13

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS^{prayingthat in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds^{of Criminal Petition,the High Court may} be pleased toto quash the^proceedings against^{the petitioner/ accused no.1 in} CC. No.1 of 2024 on the file of^{Learned Principal JuniorCivil Judge - Cum-} Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sangareddy.

¶14

LA. NO: 2OF 2025

¶15

Petition under Section 528 of^{BNSS prayingthat in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds^{of CriminalPetition,theHigh Court may} be pleased to stay all further^{proceedingsin CC- No.1 of 2024 on the file of} Learned Principal Junior civil Judge -^{cum- Judicial Magistrate of First class,} Sangareddy.

¶16

This Petition coming on for hearing,upon^{perusingthe Memorandum of} Grounds of Criminal Petition and^{upon hearingthe argumentsof} sri Shreyas Reddy Yalagiri, Advocate^{for the Petitioner and Sri Veeramalla} Jithender Rao, Additional Public^{Prosecutor on behalfof the RespondentNo1.} and None appeared for the^{respondent no.2.}

¶17

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶18

¶19

t,-- F=-:=-7

¶20

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

¶21

CRIMINAL PETIT toN No.10287 OF 2025

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

This Crirninal^petition is filed by the petitioner _ accused No.1 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.i of 2O24on the file of the learned Principar Junior civir Judge - cum - Judiciar Magistrate of First Class, Sangareddy, registered for the offences under Sections 448, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the lndian Penal Code (for shoi-t "lpC").

¶24

Heard tl're submissions of Sri Shreyas Reddy.y, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional^public prosecutor for respondent No..l _ State

¶25

The learned petitioner counsel has submitted that the de facto complainant and the petitioner are wife and husband and that the petitioner herein is the wife who reft the matrimonial home in 2023 itself and subsequenfly, the de facto complainant has filed the divorce OF,. after which the petitioner went along with her brother to negotiate a setflement to the house of rhe de facto complainant, whereupon he has Iodged this complaint alleging trespass against the petitioner. There was no criminal intention behind going to the house of the de facfo complainant and that they

¶26

¶27

went only to^{resolve the dispute but out of grudge the present} petition is lodged by the^{de facfo complainantagainst his own wife} and brother-in-law.^{Therefore, prayed to quash the same'}

¶28

The learned^{Additional Public Prosecutoi has submitted that} the statement of^{LW4 who is a family friend of lhe de facto} complainantandhisStatementrevealsthatthepetitionerherein usedtoinsultthedefactocomplainant,hisfamilymembersinfront of others and^{there are several incidents wherein shewas} threatening the^{in-laws and husbandas narrated by LW4' He} therefore^{prayedto dismiss the petition'}

¶29

Perused the^record.

¶30

C.C.No.01 of^{2024 on the file of the learned PrincipalJunior} Civil^judge -^cum -^{Judiciallr/lagistrate of First Class, Sangareddy'} is pending against^{the accused herein for the offences under} Sections 448,^{323, 504, 5OO read with Section 34 of the lndian} Penal Code.

¶31

A^perusal of^{the statementof LW4 as pointed out by the} learnedAdditionalPublicProsecutorpointsoutcertainallegations and the incidents of^{threateningand intimidationagainstthe} de facto complainant.^{Further' the complaint points out the}

Fr.-="-=;=7

allegation of trespass. The truth or otherwise in the statements of witnesses <;arr be tested during the course of trial. Hence, considering tht> facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the proceedings at this stage.

¶37

ln the result, the Criminal petition is disposed of directing the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge _ cum _ Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sangareddy, to dispose of C.C.No.1 of 2024 at the earliest, stricfly in accordance with law, without being influenced by any of the ob,servations made by this Court. However, the attendance of the petitioner is dispensed with before the trial court, unless her presence is specifically required by the trial Court during the course of trial, provided that she shall be represented by her counsel on every' date of hearing.

¶38

[\4iscellanerous applications pending, if any, shall stand

¶39

closed

¶40

¶41

sn/_ T.BHAVAN| SWAMY REGTSTRAR i^WtiNr //rRUE coPY// r ..r;rr" orrrcen t,

¶42

1 The Principal Jurrior civir Judge-cum-Judrciar MagistXte of First crass, Sangareddy.

¶43

The station House officer, Ammenpur porice station, sangareddy District 3. One CC to Sri Sihreyas Reddy yaiagiri, Advocate tOpUCl 4. Two CCs to the t,ubtic prosecut r, fi;h^'C;,r fir the State of Tetangana, Hyderabad. [OU-t]

¶44

Two CD Copies

YIR /gh

HIGH COURT

DATED:21108t2025

ORDER

1'. 1 n: :: /',' ;
Ct
a ,. .
t' 'r' ),
.l
0 B u[I 2625 rJ
I
'1
._..<br>

¶50

¶51

CRLP.No.10287 ot 2O2S

¶52

DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION.

¶53

tro

¶54

Smt.Chennam Setti Bhavya Shree @ Pippala Bhavya Shree v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Chennam Setti Bhavya Shree @ Pippala Bhavya Shree 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

Vutukuri Kamala Purushothamma Vs The State of Telangana

Chirumani Padma Vs The State of the Telangana

Tatikonda Abhishek Vs The State of Telangana

Pandeti Anjaneyulu Vs The State of Telangana

Bhoyar Nilesh @ Boyer Nilesh Sambha Vs The State of Telangana

Smt Pashikkanti Lakshmi Narsamma Vs The State of Telangana