Disposed

Taduri Anjani v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC10 Dec 2025CRLP/16442/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused Nos.2 to 5 in a dowry case sought quashing of proceedings; the petition was restricted to dispensing with their personal appearance before the trial court, which was granted subject to counsel representation on every hearing date.

What did the court decide?

Personal appearance of petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 5 dispensed with, subject to appearance through counsel on every hearing date.

Taduri Anjani Vs The State of Telangana — Dowry and Cruelty | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

WEDNESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 16442 OF2025

¶6

Between:

¶7

Taduri Anjani, w/o.Rajaiah, Aged about 6g years, occ.Housewife, R/o.plot No.32, H.No.3-11812,lTCl Colony, Road No.8, Near Fish Building, Ghatkesar, Boduppal, Ranga Reddy District,TS.

¶8

Taduri Rajaiah, S/o.Balaiah, Aged about 77 years, occ. Rtd. Asst Director, R/o.Plot No.32, H.No.3-1 1812, lTCl Colony, Road No.8, Near Fish Building, Ghatkesar, Boduppal, Rangareddy District, TS.

¶9

Bhagya Sree, Wo.Mohammad Razak, Aged about 50 years, Occ. Housewife, Rl/o.Plot No.32, H.No.3-1 1812,lTCl Colony, Road No.B, Near Fish Building, Ghatkesar, Boduppal, Rangareddy District, TS.

¶10

Taduri Sree Dev!, Wo.Shivaraj Singh Takur, Aged about 44 years, Occ.Housewife, R/o.Plot No.32, H.No.3-1-11812, lTCl Colony, Road^-No.8, Near Fish Building, Ghatkesar, Boduppal, Rangareddy District, fS.

¶11

...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No. 2 to 5

¶12

AND

¶13

1 . The State of Telangana, Through its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana.

¶14

Pegadap-alli Saritha, D/o.Late Gattaiah, Aged about 41 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o.H.No.4-5-81, Jyothinagar, Annapurna Colony,Medipally Road, NTPC, Ramagundam, Peddapally District, TS.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the l\Iemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings inCC.477 of 2O25 dated 25tOGt2O25 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Godavarikhani, as far as the Petitioners/Accused No.2 to 5 are concerned

¶17

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2025

¶18

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS 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 CC.477 of 2025 dated 25lOOl2O25 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Godavarikhani, as far as the Petitioners/Accused No.2 to 5 are concerned

¶19

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing^:ihe Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri B. Ajay , representing Sri C.H.JAYAKRISHNA ,Advocate for the Petitioners and Sri V. JITHENDAR RAO, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 .

¶20

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶21

IN THE HIGH COURT F'OR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶22

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO

o.1

Date: 10.12.2025

Between:

Taduri Anjani and three others

¶27

...Petitioners

¶28

AND

¶29

The State of Telangana, Through its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana and another

¶30

...Respondents

¶31

ORDER

¶32

This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.477 of 2025, on the file of learned Principal

¶33

Junior Civil Judge, Godavarikhani, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.2 to 5, for the offences punishable under section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya sanhitha, 2023 and section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶34

Heard Mr.B.Ajay, learned counsel, representing Mr.c.H.Jayakrishna, learned counsel for the petitioners and

¶35

Mr.v.Jithendar Rao, learned Additional public prosecutor for

respondent-Lle-.1

; - I

a i j I I i I

,_)

Though the criminal petition was filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.477 of 2025, the learned counsel for the petitioners restricted his prayer requesting this Court to dispense with the appearance of the petitioners/accused l..los.2 to 5 in c.c.No.477 of 2025, on the file of learned Principal Junior civil Judge, Godavarikhani.

¶42

4- The leamed Additional Public Prosecutor has not opposed the submission made by the learned counsel for petitioner.

¶43

In view of the above submissions, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the prer;ence of the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 5 in c.c.No.4 77 of zYllz.i,on the file of learned Principal Junior civil Judge, Godavarikhani, is dispensed with, subject to the condition that they shall represent through their counsel on each and every date of hearing. If the presence of the petitioners is required, they shall appear before the trial Court. In case of their non-appearance on the specific date fixed by the trial Court for their appearance, the tnal Court is entitled to proceed with the matter, in accordance with raw.

¶44

Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed of.

¶45

¶46

¶47

Pending miscellaneous^{applications, if any, shall stand}

closed.

SD/- L. VIJAYA STANT

//TRUE COPY/

OFFICER

To,

The Principal Junior Civil Judge, Godavarikhani, Peddepalli District.

¶54

The Station House Officer , NTPC Police Station, Peddapalli^District.

¶55

Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana^at Hyderabad (OUT)

¶56

One CC to SRl. C. H. JAYAKRISHNA, Advocate IOPUC]

¶57

Two CD Copies

¶58

kul l-

e €

HIGH COURT

JSRJ

DATED:10 11212025

ORDER

S
1t
Cr
(jt
1 0 0tt 2U6
-k

¶66

CRLP.No.16442 of 2025

¶67

DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION.

¶68

( 0-
\1/
r6

Taduri Anjani v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Taduri Anjani 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

Smt Vijaymala Vs Smt. Vanitha Pawar

Kondapally Ramulu Vs The State of Telangana

Amit Sharma, Vs The State of Telangana

Shaik Shafi Vs The State of Telangana

Thakur Sujatha Vs The State of Telangana

UzmaTarannaum @ UzmaTarannum Vs The State of Telangana