Disposed

Chittari Srinath v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Jul 2025CRLP/8188/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 528 BNSS sought quashing of DVC proceedings. Petitioners instead requested dispensation of personal appearance before the trial court. The court, noting DVC proceedings are civil in nature, dispensed personal appearance subject to appearing through counsel and attending when directed, and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Personal appearance of petitioners in DVC No.19 of 2024 dispensed; to appear through counsel and personally when directed by trial court.

Chittari Srinath Vs The State of Telangana — Domestic Violence | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

|³²¹⁷ I

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8'188 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Chittari Srinath, S/o Saita Kumar, Aged. 32 vearc, Occ. Software Employee, R/o.H.No.18-4-7, Railway Colony, Tirupathi (Urban), Chittoor District, State of Andhra Pradesh.

¶9

Smt. Chittari Movva Lalitha Kumari, Wo Saila Kumar, age 71 years, Occ. Retired TTD Employee, R/o.H.No. 1 8-4-7, Railway Cotony,-Tirupaihi (Urban), Chittoor Diskict, State of Andhra Pradesh.

¶10

Sri Chittari Saila Kumar, S/o Late Srinviasa Varma, Age 66 years, Occ. Retired TTD Employee, R/o.H.No.'18-4-7, Railway Colony, Tirupdthi (Urban), Chittoor District, State of Andhra Pradesh. (The Residenie Addiess R1 to R3 Wrongly Stated. by the De-facto cornplainant as Tirupati Address), Actually they are residing at Ho0se of D.1205, Mahindra Asvitha Alartmentd,

¶11

'Hafeezpet Road, Miyapur, Ranga Reddy District.

¶12

Chittari Siddartlra, S/o Saila Kumar, Age.41 years, Occ. Pvt Employee, R/o Flat No.1003,.Black No.1B, My Home Vihang-a TNGO Cotony, N'eai e City, Financial District, Gachibowli, Ranga Reddy District.

¶13

...Petitioners/Respondents

¶14

AND

¶15

The S-tate of Telangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Building, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶16

Chittarr @ Gadde Manasa, Wo Srinath, D/o Gadde Srinivas Rao, age. 31 years, R/o P 1?95, Mahindra Asvitha Apartments, Hafeezpet Road, Miyapur, Ranga Reddy District.

¶17

... RespondenUPetitioner/Complaina nUAg grieved Person

¶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 quadh the proceedings in D.V.C.No. 19 of 2024 pending on the file of the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum- Vlll Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Ranga Reddy Distrcit at Kukatpally

:.::L*Y^'ts

,,/

LA. NO: 1OF 2025

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 of all further proceedings in D.V.C.No.19 of 2024 pending on the fite of the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum- Vlll Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Ranga Reddy Distrcit at Kukatpally including the appearance of the petitioners before the Trail Court.

¶23

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri RAGHAVAN K THALAPAKA, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and None appeared for the Respondent No.2.

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

l i

i I i

t I I

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI

¶30

CRIMINAL PETITION No.8188 of 2025

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

This petition is filed under Section 528 of .Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023,^{seeking quashment of proceedingsin DVC} No.19 of 2024, on the^{file of learned PrincipalJunior Civil Judge-cum-} Vlll Additional Judicial Nlagistrate^{of First Class Court, Ranga Reddy} District at Kukatpally, against^{the petitioners/respondentNos.1 to 4.}

¶33

Heard Mr.Raghavan K^{Thalapaka, learned counselfor the} petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla,^{learnedAdditional} Public Prosecutor appearing^{for the respondent No'1-State.}

¶34

t t

¶35

Learned couhsel for the^{petitioners would submit that though the} application is filed for^{quashment,the petitioners are prepared to meet} the challenge in the trial^{proceedings, however, their presence on each} adjournment is causing^{severe inconvenience and effecting their} respective avocations. Therefore,^{prayed for dispensing theirpersonal} appearance unless it is^{requiredfor the proceedingsand such} direction would redress^{theirgrievance.}

¶36

Learned Additional Public^{Prosecutor reportedno specific} objection, however^prayed for^{direction for appearanceof the} petitioners on the material stages in the^proceedings.

¶37

Having regard to the difficulty pleaded by the petitioners and the fact that the proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act are essentially civil in nature, dispensing the presence of the petitioners subject to conditions that, they shall appear through their counsel for the proceedings and their personal presence as and when directed by the Court, is found appropriate. Accordlngly

¶38

ordered.

¶39

With this direction, this Criminal Petition is disposed of.

¶40

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶41

SD/. A.V.S.PRASAD DEPUW REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY,

J SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Principar Junior civir Judge-qvm-vilr Additionar Judiciar Magistrate of

¶47

_^{First Class Court, Ranga Redty Dist.}

¶48

? 9n"^{CC to SRt RAGHAVANK TH4LAi^KA,} Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two Hyderabad ccs to the [OUT]^{pubric prosecutor,} High coui'i tor irre Stii" orlLt"ngun, "t

¶49

Two CD Copies

--7

SM/PSL

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0410712025

ORDER

t oR lHE S Ta
o
1 1 JUL 2025
.o
-a
tr
,.
.t_

¶58

CRLP.No.8188 of 2025

¶59

DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION

Chittari Srinath v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chittari Srinath 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

Yeradesi Shankar Venkata Raju, Vs The State of Telangana

Arbindi Kiranmayi @ Ch Kiranmayi Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Aarey Yashwanth Vs The State of Telangana

A. Raghu Ram Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Datrika Jaya Sree Vs Bodkam Venkata Rama Rao

Mohammed Rayeed @ Rayees Vs The State of Telangana