D. Akhil Deep and 3 others Vs The State of Telangana and… — Dowry and Cruelty | Telangana HC (2025)

D. Akhil Deep and 3 others Vs The State of Telangana and… — Dowry and Cruelty | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Personal presence of petitioners Nos.1, 2 and 4/accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 before the trial Court dispensed with unless specifically required during trial, subject to their representation by counsel on every date of hearing; criminal petition dismissed as abated in respect of deceased petitioner No.3 and disposed of in respect of petitioners Nos.1, 2 and 4; miscellaneous applications closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the proceedings in C.C.No.1494 of 2020 on the file of the Principal Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kodad, for offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 and 420 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, ought to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. +1 more

Court's answer

The criminal petition is disposed of in respect of petitioners Nos.1, 2 and 4/accused Nos.1, 2 and 4, and dismissed as abated in respect of petitioner No.3/accused No.3, whose death during pendency was reported by learned counsel.

Ratio / Principle

Without expressing any view on the merits of the case, the presence of petitioners Nos.1, 2 and 4/accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 before the trial Court is dispensed with unless their presence is specifically required during the course of trial.

Key takeaways

The dispensation of personal presence is subject to the condition that petitioners Nos.1, 2 and 4/accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 are represented by their counsel on every date of hearing.ratio¶31
In case of non-appearance of petitioners Nos.1, 2 and 4/accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 on a specific date fixed by the learned trial Court for their appearance, the trial Court is entitled to proceed with the matter in accordance with law.ratio¶31
Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by accused Nos.1 to 4 to quash proceedings in C.C.No.1494 of 2020 of P.S. Nadigudam, Suryapet District (offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 and 420 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961) pending before the Principal Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kodad. During hearing, counsel for the petitioners restricted the prayer to dispensation of personal presence — petitioner No.1 being a pilot, petitioner No.2 a retired employee suffering old-age ailments, and petitioner No.4 residing in the USA and absent even at registration of the crime. It was submitted that petitioner No.3 (D. Sunitha) had died, so the cause did not survive against her. Held, without expressing any view on the merits: (i) presence of petitioners Nos.1, 2 and 4 before the trial Court dispensed with unless specifically required during trial, subject to their representation by counsel on every date of hearing; (ii) on failure to appear on a date specifically fixed for their appearance, the trial Court may proceed in accordance with law; (iii) petition dismissed as abated qua deceased petitioner No.3 and disposed of qua petitioners Nos.1, 2 and 4; miscellaneous applications closed.

[³³⁰³ J

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF^{TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD}

TUESDAY.THE ELEVENTH DAY OF NOVEIVIBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE J SREENIVAS^RAO

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3626 OF 2022

Between:

'l D. Akhil Deep and 3 others, S/o Shanthappa Aged about 34 years, Occ Pilot, R/o Ayyappa Society PamidiTowers [Madhapur.^Hyderabad.

D Shanthappa, S/o. Abel Aged^{about 67 years, Occ. Retd. Employee, R/o.} R/o Ayyappa Socierty Pamidi Towers^{lvladhapur . Hyderabad.}

D. Sunitha, Wo. Shanthappa, Aged^{about55 years, Occ.Housewife,R/o R/o} Ayyappa Society Parnidi Towers Madhapur.^Hyderabad.

4 D.Nishita, D/o Shanthappa Aged^{about 34 years, Occ. Pilot, R/oAyyappa} Society Pamidi Tcwers lVladhapur^{Hyderabad- presently workingin USA rep} her General Power ol Attorney Holder^{D.Akhil Deep}

...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No'1^{to 4}

AND

1 . The State of Telangana, Rep. by^{Public Prosecutor Hrgh Court for the State of} -[elangana, Hyderabad.

Devigari Sravanthi. Wo. Akhil Deep^{Aged about28 years,O-cc. Housewife,} R/o Ekhlas Khanpet Village, Nadigudam^{[\4andal,SuryapetDistrict.}

...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS

Petition under Section 482 of^{Cr.P .C praying that in the circumstances} stated in the lr/emorandum of Grounds^{of criminalPetition,the Highcourt may} be pleased to^quash the^{proceedrngs in C-C. 1494of 2020 of P.S. Nadigudam,} Suryapet District registered U/sec^{323, 506, 498-Aof lPC, 420R/w. Sec 3 and} 4 of D P Act pending on the file of^{Prl .l F.C.N/ Kodad.}

LA. NO: 2 OF 2022

Petition under Section^{482 of Cr.P.C prayingthat in the circumstances} stated in the lVlemorandunr^{of Groundsof criminalPetition, the High court may} be pleased to stay all further^{proceedingsin C.C No. 1494 oI 2020 of P.S'} Nadigudam, Suryapet District^{registered ,U/sec.323, 506, 498-A'420of lPC,} R/w Sec. 3 and 4 of DP Act^{pendingon the file of PRLJ F.C.M.Kodad.}

This Petition cominr; on^{for hearing,upon perusing the [/emorandum of} Grounds of Criminal Petition^{and upon hearing the arguments of Sri U V} suRESH KUIVAR, Advocate^{for the Petitioner and sri JithenderRao Veeramalla,} the A<iditional Pub[c Prosecutor^{on behalfof the Respondent No.1 and none} appeared for the Respondent^No.2.

The Court made the following:^ORDER

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

CRIMINAL PETITION No . 3626 of 2o22

ORDER:

Thrs Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Crirninal procedure, Ig7 3 , by the petitioners / accused Nos. 1 to 4 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1494 of 2O2O on the fije of the principal Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kodad, for tlLe, offences under Sections 498-.4, 323, 506 and 42O of the in,lian penal Code, 186O, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry prohibition Act. 1961.

Hcard Mr.U.V. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. Sowmya Sanisetty, Ir_.arned counsel rr:presenting Mr. Venkateshwarlu Sanisetty, learr-recI counscl for respondent No.2, who appeared through video conference and Mr. M. Vivekarranda Reddy, learned .{ssistant public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No. 1 Sta,e.

Lear-ned counsel for the petitioners subrnitted that petitioner No.3/accr.rsed No.3, narnely D. Sur-ritha, died. By virtue of the same, the cause in ttre present ,:rirninal petition does not survive against her.

.-
x"trwq
.':rI

2

Dr-rring the COLITSE of hearing,^{learned counsel for the} petitioners restricted^{hisprayerreqr-esting Lhe Courtto} dispense with the^{presenceof the petitioners inC C No' 1494} of 2O2O on^{the ground that petitione r No 1 is a Piiot' petitioner} No.2 is a retired^{employee sufferingwith old age ailments'and} petitioner No.4,^{who was notpresentcven at the time of} regrstration^{of the crirne, is residing 1n the USA'}

In view of the^{above said submission'this CourL without} expressing^{any view on the rnerits of the case'the presence of} the petitioner^{Nos.l, 2and 4/accuscd Nos l' 2 and 4 before} the trial Court^{isdispensed withunless theirpresence is} specihcally^{requiredduring the courseof trial} '^{sub ject to the} condition of^{the petitioner Nos 1,2and 4/accusedNos l'2} ald 4 being^{represented by their counsel on every date of} hearing. In^{case of non-appearanceof the petitioner Nos l'2} arrd 4/accused^{Nos.1, 2 and' 4 on the specific date so fixed by} the learned^{trial Court for their appeararrce' the trial Court is} entitled to^{proceed with the rna'tter in accordance witkr law'}

With the above^{directions,the crirninal petitionls} disposed of^{inrespectof the petitioner Nos l} '^2and 4/accrrsed Nos.1,^{2 and' 4; and dismissed as abatedin respect} of petitioner^{No.3/accused No'3'}

3

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, sha11 stand

closed

SD/-N-CHAt.IDRA SEKHAR^RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR

//TRUE^COPY//

SECTION^OFFICER

Tc,

1^{'fre JudicialN4agistrate of First Class' Kodad'} 2 Tre^{Station louseOrrce', poro" St'iio" Nadrgudam Suryapet District} 3 fwo^{CCsto the PUBLIC pnoslcUfon'High Court at Hvderabad(OUT)} ;^,r;; cc^{to snr t-l v suRESH l(ulvAR Advocate [opuc]}

5 Two^{CD CoPtes}

I ['K^srr

HIGI-I COURT

DATED:1 111112425

ORT}ER

CRLP.NT>.3626 of 2022

qlir 'i :
.s
':',,
.to -/;
l{ $-
\
ifl

CFIflMINAL PETITION IS DISPOSED OF

q
J