Disposed

Basheerunnisa Begum v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Feb 2025CRLP/2258/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of proceedings under Sections 498-A, 420 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act but restricted the prayer during arguments. The High Court disposed of the petition dispensing with their appearance before the trial court, subject to representation by counsel on every hearing date.

What did the court decide?

Appearance of petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 6 before the trial Court dispensed with unless specifically required, subject to representation by counsel on each date.

Basheerunnisa Begum Vs The State of Telangana — Dowry and Cruelty | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

I^32s7 |

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶4

TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI

¶7

CRIMINAL PETIT ION NO:2258OF 2025

¶8

Between:

¶9

1 Basheerunnisa Begum, Wo Late Mohammed Ali. (Mother of Accused No 1) AS". 9.5^{yrs, Caste. Muslim,Occ. RetdGovt EmployeeR/o} H.No 5-7_.1^jS, Sri Ram Nagar Colony, Kamareddy Town, Kamaredby bistrict.

¶10

z Asma Fathima @ AsmaSulthana, Wo Mohammed Khaja pasha, (Sister of Accused_No.'1) Age 32 yrs, Caste. Muslim, Occ. Housewife, nlo' fi.flo S-7_ '1 '15, Sri Ram Nagar Colony, Kamareddy Town, Kamareddy District

¶11

¶12

3 Mohammed Khaja Pasha, S/o Mohammed yousuf, (Brother in law of Accused No.'1) Age.'45 yrs, Caste_ Muslim, Occ. Business, Rio H.No S-7-115, Sri ilm Nagar Colony, Kamareddy Town, Kamareddy Disirict.

¶13

4 Syed Javid Ali, S/o Late Mohammed Ali, (Brother of Accused No.1) Aqe. 37 yrs, Caste. A/luslim, Occ. Busingss, R/o H No S-l-115, Sri Ram Nagjr C"olony, Kamareddy Town, Kamareddy District.

¶14

E Syed^Abed Ali, S/o Late l\rtohammed Ali, (Brother of Accused No.1) Aqe. 28 yrs, Caste. Muslim, Occ. pvt jo!, nlo H.Nb 5-7-1i5, Sri Ram f.fagar Ctiony, Kamareddy Town, Kamareddy District.

¶15

...Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 6

¶16

AND

¶17

1 The.State of Telangana, through, WPS Adilabad, Adilabad District Rep.by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶18

.Respondent

¶19

2 Syed Sara Fathima Wo Syed Sajid Ali, Age.25 yrs, caste. Muslim, Occ. Housewife R/o Kamareddy now residing a[ Old Hbusing Board Adilabad

¶20

...RespondenUDe facto Complainant

¶21

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 Quash the cc No. 263 of 2021 on the file of the Judicr:al Magistrate of FirslClass at Adilabad the alleged offence under Crime No.43 of 2OiO i.e., Ut Sec. 498 (A). 420 lPC. Sec. 3 and 4 of D.p.

¶22

.:]

¶23

l.A. NO: 1OF 2025

¶24

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^{praying that in the circumstances} stated in the tr,4emorandum of Grounds^{of Criminal Petition, the Higl' Court may be} pleased to stay of all fLrrther proceedings and appearance of^{petitio,ter/Accusedin} Crime No. 43 of 2020 dated 22.10.2020^{registeredby WPS Adilabad,Adilabad} District and CC No. 263 of 2021 on the^{file of the JudicialFirst Clas';lvlagistrate at} Adilabad pending disposal of the^{main petition for quashing the sam l}

¶25

This Petition c.otring on for hearing,^{upon perusing the Ms:morandumof} Grounds of Criminal lretition and upon^{hearingthe arguments of Sr SRIKRISHNA} KUYYA, Advocate fo,'the Petitioner and the^{Public Prosecutor(TCi)on behalfof} the Respondent No.1 and None appeared^{for the Respondent No.2}

¶26

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

i_ '.

¶28

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI

¶29

CRIMINAL PETITION No.2258 of 2025

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

I t

¶32

This Criminal Petition is filed by the^petitioners /accused Nos.2 to 6 seeking to^quash the^proceedings against them in C.C.No.263 of 2021 pending on the file of learned Judicial [Vlagistrate of First Class, at Adilabad for the offences under sections 498-4,^{420 of} lndian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act

¶33

a (

¶34

2 Heard Mr.K.Srikrishna, learned counsel for^petitioners, Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.2-State and^perused the record.

¶35

Though the petition is filed for quashing the^proceedings, during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the^{petitioners has} restricted his prayer to the extent of dispensing with the^{presence of the} petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 6 before the trial Court.

¶36

Hence, this petition is disposed of dispensing with 'the appearance of the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 6 before the^{trial Cou(} unless their presence is specifically required during the course^{of trial,} subject to the condition of petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 6 being represented by their counsel on every date of hearing.

:i:

.,,1,r

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall s:and closed

¶41

Sd/- L. LAKSHMI BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

$$.t;^OFFICER

To,

The Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adilabad.

¶46

The Station House Officer, WPS Adilabad, Adilabad Dist.

¶47

One CC to SRI SRIKRISHNA KUYYA, Advocate [OPUC]

¶48

Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of l elangana at Hyderabad [OLJT]

¶49

Two CD Copies

SN/

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1810212025

ORDER

o e { tE S r.rt, c
t
(
()
Ai 2u5
(
*
D4fCtt

¶57

CRLP.No.2258 of 2025

¶58

DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION

Basheerunnisa Begum v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basheerunnisa Begum 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

Sri. Venkata Sarath Babu Bandi Vs The State of Telangana

Jillellamudi Venkata Muralidhar Vs The State of Telangana

Komi Sudakar Reddy @ Sudhakar Shiva @ K.Sudhakar, Vs The State of Telangana

Karupakala Sampath Kumar @ Sampath, Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Shaker Vs The State of Telangana

Adepu Prabhanjan Vs Adepu Pravalika