Kommineni Yadagiri, Vs The State of Telangana — Domestic Violence | Telangana HC (2025)

Kommineni Yadagiri, Vs The State of Telangana — Domestic Violence | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether DVC No.48 of 2023, pending before the IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at L.B. Nagar, should be withdrawn and transferred to the Family Court/competent court at Suryapet District (Tr.Crl.P.No.75 of 2024). +2 more

Ratio / Principle

The nature of trial in the MC, DVC and OS being different - the OS having been filed for partition of joint family property while the MC and DVC pertain to domestic violence - even assuming the MC and DVC were transferred, all the matters could not be tried together with the OS; hence consolidation at Suryapet was not warranted.

Key takeaways

Though learned counsel for petitioners relied on several judgments, they did not come to the aid of the petitioners in view of factual differences; therefore there were no merits in the transfer criminal petitions and they were liable to be dismissed.ratio¶79

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana (Smt Justice K. Sujana), Transfer Criminal Petitions Nos. 75 & 78 of 2024, decided 24.02.2025 - DISMISSED. Petitioners (Kommineni Yadagiri and family members, respondents in the underlying cases) sought transfer of DVC No.48/2023 from the IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at L.B. Nagar, and of M.C. No.63/2023 from the Judge, Family Court, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Malkajgiri, to the Family Court/competent courts at Suryapet District, pleading that O.S.No.03/2023 (a partition suit filed at Suryapet by K.Banuteja, described as the complainant's son) was pending there and that transfer would avoid multiplicity of proceedings; several Supreme Court judgments were pressed into service. The Court held that the nature of trial in the MC, DVC and OS differs - the OS having been filed for partition of joint family property while the MC and DVC pertain to domestic violence - so the matters could not be tried together even if transferred, and the relied-upon judgments did not assist the petitioners owing to factual differences. Both transfer criminal petitions were dismissed with no order as to costs, and pending miscellaneous applications stood closed.

[^338s ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FUE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 75 AND 78 OF 2024

TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 75 OF 2024

Between:

'1 . Kommineni Yadagiri, S/o. Late Sattaiah, Aged about. 64 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. H.No.7-2'12, Near Mallieshwari Theater, Tirumalagiri Town and Mandal, Suryapet District, TG.

Smt,Kommineni Vijaya, W/o K.Yadagiri, Aged about. 57 years, Occ. Housewife, Rl/o. H.No.7-212, Near Mallieshwari Theater, Tirumalagiri Town and Mandal, Suryapet District, TG

3, Kommineni Sathish Kumar, S/o. K.Yadagiri, Aged about. 39 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.7-212, Near Mallieshwari Theater, Tirumalagiri Town and Mandal, Suryapet District, TG.

Kommineni Praveen Kumar, S/o. K.Yadagiri, Aged about. 35 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.7-212, Near Mallieshwari Theater, Tirumalagiri Town and Mandal, Suryapet District, TG.

5, Kommineni Jayachandar, S/o.K.Yadagiri, Aged about. 30 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.7-212, Near Mallieshwari Theater, Tirumalagiri Town and Mandal, Suryapet District, TG.

... Petitioners/Respondents

AND

The State of Telangana, its rep PP High Court of Hyderabad

Smt.K.Chandrakala, D/o. Rangaiah, W/o. Late Puppala Sattaiah, Aged about 51 years, Occ. Business, R/o.H.No.7-1971711 ,'X' Road, 4th Ward. Tirumalagiri Town and Mandal, Suryapet District508223, TG. Mobile No. 97 0 1 334293, 957 3484022.

...Respondents/Complai na nt

Petition under Section 447 of BNSS, 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to withdraw the D.V.C No. 48 of 2023, which is pending on the file of the Hon'ble lV-Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, at L. B. Nagar, and transfer the D.V.C. No. 48 of 2O23, before the Hon'ble Family Court, at

suryapet District, or any other appropriate courts in suryapet District, having jurisdiction over the case, t6 try the D.v.c. No. 48 ot zo2z, because same complainant son, i.e., K.Bhanuteja fired a farse and frivorous suit, o.s.No. 0312023, suit for partition and separate possession before the Hon'ble Senior civil and Asst.sessions Judge, at Suryapet, suryapet District, in order to avoid the_ conflicting orders/judg ments in various false cases filed by the complainant and her son, and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon,ble court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

l.A. NO: 1OF 2024

Petition under Section 447 of BNSS, 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support ot ine-pe-tition, the High court may be pleased to grant stay of afl further proceedings incruding appearance in D.V.C.No. 48 of 2023, which is pending on the file oithe Hon,ble lV-Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal-Markajgiri Districl, at L. B. Nagar, pending disposal of the Transfer Criminal petition.

l.A. NO: 1OF 2025

Petition under section 15i cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, ine Hign court may be pleased in the interest of justice to condone the delay of (114) days in repreienting the writ Petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon,ble iourt deeris fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2025

Between:

Smt.K.Chandrakala, Dio Bglg.gt-,_, ry1q. Latepuppata Sattaiah, Aged about. 51 years, occ. B_usiness, R/o.H.Nb.7-197nr. 'x' Roari, 4th ward. TirLimaraoiri rown g!9.!Y?E?L Suryapet District-508223, TG Mobite r.ro gzOirJ+ZSJ 9573484022

AND

1 Kommineni _Y,adagi1, :Slo; ^ L?!e Sattaiah, Aged about. 64 years, Occ. Agriculture,. R/o. H.No.7-212, Near Malieshwaii Theitei. fiirriLgni f;r; and Mandal, Suryapet District, TG.

Smt.Kommineni Vijaya, Wo. K.yadagiri, Aqed about. 57 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o. H.No.7-212, Near Maliieshwa"ri fneit",, fnrmlLgni fi;r;i and Mandal, Suryapet District, TG.

Kommineni Sathish Kumar, S/o. K.yadagiri, Aoed about. 39 years, Occ. B-usiness, Rl/o. H.No.7-212.Near Mailieshr,iari rh6ater, rrrumatagiiiiorin-;; Mandal, Suryapet District, TG.

' [!I,[T::4,3:?,t{z5rTi!"11",5;I3,l,i3ll'tf:%",i,1fl,1h,',,'d,'fl*":"* Mandal, Suryapet District, TG.

Kommineni Jayachandar, S/o.K.Yadagiri, Aged about. 30 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.7-212, Near Mallieshwari Theater, Tirumalagiri Town and Mandal, Suryapet District, TG. ... Respondents/ Petitioners

The State of Telangana, its rep by its State PP High Court of Hyderabad

... Respondents/Respondents

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the lnterim Order dated 30.08 2024 passed in TRCRLP.No.75 of 2024 in the interest of^justice and to pass such other order or orders that are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 78 OF 2024

Between:

Kommineni Yadagiri, S/o. Late Sattaiah, Aged about.64 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. H.No.7-212, Near Mallieshwari Theater, Tirumalagiri Town and Mandal, Suryapet District, TG. ...Petitioner/Respondent in MC

AND

State of Telangana, Rep by its State Public Prosecutor High Court at Hyderabad

Smt.K.Chandrakala, D/o. Rangaiah, Wio. Late Puppala Sattaiah Aged about. 51 years, Occ. Business, R/o.H.No.7-1971711, X Road,4th Ward, Tirumalagiri Town & Mandal, Suryapet District-508223, TG. Mobile No 9701334293, 9573484022.

K.Banuteja, S/o. Late Puppala Sattaiah, Aged about. 24 years, Occ. Private Employee, R/o.H.No.7-'1971711 ,'X' Road,4th Ward, Tirumalagiri Town and Mandal, suryapet District-508223, TG f\ilobile No. 970 1 33429 3, 957 3484022

... Respondents/Petitioners in MC

Petition under Section 447 of BNSS, 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to withdraw the M.C. No. 63 of 2023, which is pending on the file of the Hon'ble Judge, Family Court, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, at Malkajgiri, and transfer the M.C. No. 63 of 2023, before the Hon'ble Family Court, at Suryapet District, or any other appropriate Courts in Suryapet District, having jurisdiction over the case, to- try the M.C. No. 43 of 2023, because same 2nd respondent herein, i.e., K.Bhanuteja filed a false and frivolous Suit, O.S.No. 03/2023, suit for partition and separate possession before the Hon'ble Senior Civil and Asst.Sessions Judge, at Suryapet, Suryapet District, in order to avoid the conflicting orders/judgments in various false cases filed by the respondents, and to grant

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2024

Petition under section 52g of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed. in.. support of the p"tition the High Court may be qleasg! 10^grant stay of ail furrher proceedings incruding ,ppeairnc" in rr,l Cl No. ??^{gf 20??,which is pendingon the fite oi th. Honbt.} Judge, ramiry Court Medchal-Malkajgiri District, at Markajgiri, pending disposar of the-Transfer 'criminat Petition.

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2024

Between:

1 Smt.K Chandrakala, D/o. Rangaiah, W/o. Late puppala Sattaiah, Aged about. !i^{yearsocj. Business, R/o.Fr.No 7-1g7rzli, 'x;A6io,} 4rh ward .lry11qtqg1^{town and Mandat,Suryapet} District_508223, IG. Mobite No. 97 0 1 334293. I 57 3484022

K.Banuteia, S/o. Late puppll?_ Sa.ttarah, Aged about 24 years, Occ. private Emptoyee, R/o. H. No. 7 - 1 97 I ! !1,' x, n"ri, itt wrio,'Tirumatagiri Town a nd Mandat, suryapet Diskict-s08223, TG tuiobite' N;.lio i seazg'j, siz sqliozz

...Petitioners/Respondents'No. 2 & 3

AND

1 Kommineni Yadaoiri. _Sloj _ L?!e Sattaiah, Aged about. 64 years, Occ. Agricurture Rto. f.ruo z-2t2, N;r,-M;r;;shwari rheater, Tirumaraoiri rown and Mandat, Suryapet District, TG. ... R"ip;;;;;#E!'triiyiii.l:

The State of rerangana, its rep by its state pp High court of Hyderabad

...Respondents/Respondents

Petition under section 52g of BNSS, 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, tn" Hign court may oe pleased to vacate the rnterim orders dated 3o/o'Bt2o24 passed ii rncnr_p [6. za of 2024 in the interest of justice and to pass

These Petitions coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri. chandrasekhar Reddy Gopireddy, Advocate for the petitioners in both cases and the Public Prosecutor on beharf of the Respondent No.1 in both cases and of sri Rapolu Bhaskar, for the Respondent No. 2 in both cases.

The Court made the following: ORDER

I

THE HONOURABLE SMT^{JUSTICE K. SUJANA}

TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION^{Nos.75 AND 78 of 20.24}

ORAL COMMON ORDER:

Since the ft-s and parties^{involvedin both the petitions} are same, they were heard^{togetherand are disposed of by this} common order.

2- Tr.Crl.P.No.75 of 2024 is hled^{prayingthis Court to} transfer DVC.No.4S of 2023^{pending on the file of the} '^IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal^{MalkajgiriDistrict,at} LB.Nagar, to the file of^{the FamilyCourt, at SuryapetDistrict'} Tr.Cr1.P.No.78 of 2024 is^{filed prayingthis Court to transfer} MC.No.63 of 2023^{pendingon the {ile of the Family Court,} Medchal Malkajgiri District,^{at Malkajgiri,to the hle of the} competent Court at Suryapet^District.

Heard Sri Chandrashekhar Reddy Gopireddy, learned counsel for petitioners,^{and Sri} Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for respondent^No.2.

Learned counsel^{for petitioners submittedthat the} allegations leveled^{against the petitionersare entirely false and}

z

SKS,J Tr.Crl.P.Nos.75 & 78 oi2024

baseless. He averred that 1st petitioner has been married to the 2.d petitioner since 1982 and they are blessed with three children together. He contended that the complainant lacks the authority to file the application under the protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2O05, as she is not a resident of the jurisdiction and has no relation with the petitioners. He alleged that the complainant has hled fabricated documents, including a false afhdavit and rental agreement, to support her false claims and that she has made inconsistent statements in different Court proceedings, including DVC No. 4g/2O23 and M.C. No. 63 /2023 which amounts to abuse of the process of law and that only with an intention to harass the petitioners by hling multiple false cases, out of jurisdiction including O.S. No. 03/2023, M.C. No. 68/2023, and DVC No.4al2023, ard also with an intention to extract money from them. Therefore, while advocating that to avoid multiplicity oi proceedings and placing reliance on the judgments rendered by the Hon,ble Supreme Court in several such instalces, he prayed this Court to allow these transfer criminal petitions, transferring M.C.No.6g/2O23, and DVC.No.48/2O23 to the file of competent Court in Suryapet District.

':rry7

3

SKS,J Tr.Crl.P.Nos.75 &^{76 of 2024}

II

On the other^{hand,learnedcounsel for respondents filed} counter, opposing^{the submissions madeby learned counsel} for petitioners,^{stating that the grounds submittedfor trartsfer} of MC., and^{DVC., are not at all maintainable and the OS'' was} hled at Suryapet^{District as the suit property was situated in} Suryapet.^{He averred t1.ateven assumingthat the saidMC''} and DVC are^{transferredto the Court where OS'' proceedings} are pending,^{a,ll the matters cannot be taken up togetheras the} suit is adjudicated^{by senior civil Judgeand DVC is triable} before Magistrate.^{Further, he asserted that respondent No'Lis} suffering with^{severeailmentsdue to whichshe cannot travel} from Medchal to^{Suryapeton each and every date of} proceedings.^{Therefore, while advocatingthat the transfer as} sought for^{is not maintainable,he prayedthis Court to dismiss} the transfer Petitions.

6- Having regard to^{rival submissions made and on going} through tJ'e^{materialplaced on record,it is noted that these} transfer^{petitions are primarilyfi1ed on the ground that OS'' is} pending before the^{Court in Suryapetand so as to avoid} multiplicity^{of proceedings,the said MC', and DVC''cases be} transferred to^{the competent Court at Suryapet'However'it is}

4

SKS,J Tr.Cr].P.Nos.75 & 78 of 2024

pertinent to mention that the nature of trial in MC., DVC., and OS., being different, even assuming that MC., and DVC., are transferred, all the matter cannot be tried along with OS., as OS., is hled for partition of joint family property and MC., and DVC., pertain to domestic violence. Further, though learned counsel for petitioners relied on several judgments, the same do not come to the aid of petitioners in view of factual differences. Therefore, there are no merits in these transfer criminal petitions, and the same are liable to be dismissed.

7 . Accordingly, these Transfer Criminal petitions are

dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Misct-'llaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

closec[.

\

To,

//TRUE COPYII

Ass'siitfl???,!'#1'*. / ECTION OFFICER I

1 il:?nI#o't'""a1 Metropolitan Masistrate, Medchal-Markajgiri Dishicr, at

2 I;a"":r";l'ff,llic Prosecutor, Hish court for the state of reransana at

1. One CC to Sri. Cl-randrasekhar Reddy Gopireddy Advocate [OPUC] 4 Two one CD CC Copiesto Sri Raporu Bhaskar, A;ril;i#Uli"'"'

DUgh dd

I

HIGH COURT

DAf ED:2410212025

COMMON ORDER

TRCRLP.No.7S AND 78 ot 2024

\ r,(C S f 4i(
oo 18 !t[it 2015 C
,+
)
E-sp yC

DISMISSING THE TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETIITONS

@a'rB ffi,