Rayala Avinash Vs The State of Telangana — Dowry and Cruelty | Telangana HC (2025)

Rayala Avinash Vs The State of Telangana — Dowry and Cruelty | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dispensation of the petitioner's personal presence in the proceedings before the III Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Khammam (case printed as 'C.C.No.37 of 2O2S' in the operative paragraph; 'C.C. No 67 of 2025' elsewhere), conditional upon (i) the petitioner's appearance through his counsel on every adjournment and (ii) his personal appearance as and when directed by the Court, any lapse rendering the order ineffective; pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed. Quashment of the proceedings was not granted.

Issue for consideration

Whether the personal presence of the petitioner (Accused No. 6), whose attendance on every adjournment was causing severe hardship and affecting his employment, could be dispensed with in the proceedings before the trial court unless required, subject to safeguards. +1 more

Court's answer

The personal presence of the petitioner in the trial-court proceedings (operative paragraph printing the case as 'C.C.No.37 of 2O2S'; elsewhere in the order referred to as 'C.C. No 67 of 2025') on the file of the learned III Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Khammam is dispensed with.

Ratio / Principle

The dispensation is expressly conditional: the petitioner must appear through his counsel on every adjournment and must appear in person as and when directed by the Court.

Key takeaways

Any lapse in abiding the above conditions would render the dispensation order ineffective.ratio¶30
With this direction the Criminal Petition stands disposed of; no quashment of the C.C. proceedings was pronounced, the petition having been disposed on the dispensation prayer alone.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA (Hon'ble Sri Justice N. Tukaramji) - Criminal Petition (CRLP.No.5361 ot 2025), disposed of: The petitioner, arraigned as Accused No. 6 in C.C. No. 67 of 2025 pending on the file of the learned III Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Khammam for offences under Sections 85, 296 (b), 115 (2) and 118 (1) r/w. 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - arising out of a 2024 FIR of Konijerla Police Station - though the petition was filed seeking quashment of the proceedings, counsel at hearing stated that the petitioner was resolved to face the proceedings but that attendance on every adjournment was causing severe hardship and affecting his employment, and prayed only for dispensation of his personal presence unless required; the Additional Public Prosecutor raised no specific objection but asked that in-person presence be retained for material stages. Having regard to these submissions, the Court dispensed the petitioner's personal presence in the trial-court proceedings, subject to his appearance through counsel on every adjournment and his personal appearance as and when the Court directs, specifying that any lapse in abiding these conditions would render the order ineffective; with this direction the Criminal Petition was disposed of and pending miscellaneous petitions were closed. No quashment was effected and no merits of the case were adjudicated; no precedent was cited. Caveats: the operative paragraph prints the case as 'C.C.No.37 of 2O2S' while the balance of the order refers to 'C.C. No 67 of 2025'; the decision-date line is OCR-illegible ('DATED:2114il2025'); the FIR number is not legible.

l ; i I

,N THE H,GH COURT FOR Ai iib'#lsrArE^{oF TELANGANA}

pR, L ' " itfJ ;lffi.Hi} l,B Til.?fi ?[t

Between:

rHE HoNo uRor..rSTur,

o"' c R rMrNAL r.r,r,"r'::L: r"offi

5niTilBlTJ*{{"Jil;:it*il;ffi s,,,5fl #,,?,,,?,1,r,?f ,iii,i,ffi ir

AND

Petitioner/AccusedNo.6

1 li#Hn%I?l#fi ti: Ii t?.,B?,ff #?;,S"ffliT,i8fl "i;,f !11",j11.,,0.,

'R[',li,3i?,rgil,,l,fift .y8xfi#fi :ffi f ?.?ffl##""*.o:"T"T.:;:"

espondent No.2/ De_factoComplainant

D^r:rj,:'##ffil;t"3t[m'.'.:tf]ss .nlavins^that in th quash rhe proceedinss uo"?r 9ff^{il'l p"1iii'i,} ti"'iriffi U'""JIililT:;I::""lf,I: fite of the f f inaOf .,,irOl#rnst the^{petitioners/Accusej} in C.C No 67 of 2025 on the : I: : :.:^{y,""" bt, i. r'jl, i#,} i iiii,i Xi;l'3'?,, i,i8 :IJi[. f] jx; :l.J f Acr wnrch arose out of FIR No. ziq or 2oi,ii "i ii""r!"rL""",ice station. Khammam

lA NO: 2 OF 202s

petition under Se^ction 52g of BNSS praying thal in the circumstances ;E::1f,yi$Tlorandum-or^{Gro,"a" .ic,.iJ.,'o3,,,,o,,the High} coun -,,.' may be pe t i t i o n e isi;J ;# il ; .1i:i,".,"!?!1'ff1[,H,f5 ffij :1iffi ;l ti. Class Magistrate, at Khammam. for the rtt"guJ offJn"" U/Sec. 85. 296(8), ",,, ",11se\ + 1 1 8( 1 ), Riw. 3 (5) BNs,n1.S:" a ""j "r'O p"n7i"*n"n arose out of FtR trto i+q of 2024 of Konijerla police Station, f1'r_.ri.' ^". "

The netition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Cririn"i p&iiion"rff ,;:" hearing the arguments of M/S^pi'ix Law Firm Advocate for ti," p"iiiiir"^'iJ[i rn" Additionar pubric appeared Prosecutor for the ior Respondent state of No_2rerangana "" o"t "rr "i'tn"^{RespondentNo. .1 None}

The Court made the following: ORDER

,

! I 1 I

THE^{FIONOURABLESRI JUSTTCEN' TUKARAMJI} CRIM INAL^{PETITIONNo.5361ot2025}

ORDER:

This^{petition is flled seeking quashmentof the C C.No 67 of} 2025^{onthe fiie of learnedlll Additional JudicialFirstClass Magistrate} at Khammam,^{against the petitioner/accusedNo 6'}

Heard^{Mr Yaseen Khan, learned counsel representing M/s'Pillix} Law Firm,^{learned counsel for petitioner and lvlr'JithenderRao} Veeramalla,^{learnedAdditional Public Prosecutor appearingfor the} respondent^{No. 1 -State.}

The^{petitioner is arrayed as accusedNo'6 in C'C No 67 oI 2025} for the offences^{under Sections85, 296 (b), 115 (2) and 118 (1) r/w. 3} (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya^{Sanhita, 2023and Sections3 and 4 of Dowry} Prohibition Act.^'1961.

Learned counsel^{for the petitioner would submit that though the} petitioner is resolved to face the^{proceedings'his presence beforethe} trial Court on each^{adjournmentis causingsevere hardshipand} effecting his employment.^{Therefore, prayed for dispensing his} personal presence unless it is^{required for the proceedingsand such} direction would redress his grievance.

5 Learned Additionar pubric prosecutor submits that there is no specific objection for the prayer, however pleaded for a direction for in

\ \

.',

person presence of the petitioner In the material stages of the proceedings.

Having regard to the submissions, subject to the petitioner,s appearance through his counsel qn evev adjournment and the petitioner's personal appearance as and when directed by the Court, the personal presence of the petitioner in the proceedings of the C.C.No.37 of 2O2S on the file of learned lll Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Khammam, is dispensed with. Additionally it is specified that any lapse in abiding the above conditions wourd render this order ineffective.

7 With this direction, this Criminal petition is disposed of.

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed

/

,TRUE COPY//

SD/-M.OSMAN ALI BAIG IASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ECTION OFFICER

To,

Hon'ble lll Additioal Judicial First Class Magistrate, Khammam.

The Station House Officer, Konijerla Police Station, Khammam District

One CC to ltI/S Pillix Law Firm Advocate [OPUC]

Two CCs to Additional Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad [OUT]

Two CD Copies

PSNRJPSL

l

I

HIGH COURT

DATED:2114il2025

'3 1ni E s I-q
(
Ja (.1(
a)
2 3 iuN 2025
{
t

ORDER

CRLP.No.5361 ot 2025

DISPOSING :IHE CRIMINAL PETITION

5

I