Smt. Rukmini Sangam, Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Smt. Rukmini Sangam, Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dispensation from personal appearance of the petitioners/respondent Nos. 2 to 6, 8 and 9 in D.V.C.No.161 of 2022, subject to representation by their counsel on every date of hearing unless their presence is specifically required during the course of the trial; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the personal appearance of the petitioners (arrayed as respondent Nos. 2 to 6, 8 and 9) in D.V.C.No.161 of 2022 before the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad can be dispensed with.

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court dispensed with the presence of the petitioners/respondent Nos. 2 to 6, 8 and 9 in D.V.C.No.161 of 2022 on the file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

Ratio / Principle

The dispensation is conditional upon the petitioners/respondent Nos. 2 to 6, 8 and 9 being represented by their counsel on every date of hearing, unless their presence is specifically required during the course of the trial.

Key takeaways

In the event of non-appearance of the petitioners/respondent Nos. 2 to 6, 8 and 9 on any date fixed by the trial Court, the trial Court shall be entitled to proceed with the matter in accordance with law.ratio¶49

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad — CRLP No.1544 of 2026 (J. Sreenivas Rao, J.; decided 09.02.2026). Filed under Section 528 BNSS by Smt. Rukmini Sangam and six others — arrayed as respondent Nos. 2 to 6, 8 and 9 — seeking quashing of proceedings in D.V.C.No.161 of 2022 on the file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, wherein they are respondents for alleged offences under Sections 19, 20, 21 and 22 of the DVC Act; respondent No. 2 (complainant) is Smt. Archana Sangam, with the State of Telangana as respondent No. 1. At hearing, counsel for the petitioners restricted the prayer to dispensation of the petitioners' personal appearance, and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor did not oppose. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court dispensed with the petitioners' presence in the DVC proceedings, subject to their being represented by counsel on every date of hearing unless their presence is specifically required during the course of the trial; in the event of non-appearance on any date fixed by the trial Court, the trial Court may proceed with the matter in accordance with law. The criminal petition stands disposed of and pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are closed.

[³³⁰³ ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGA'NA} AT HYDERABAD

IVIONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS^RAO

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1544 OF 2026

Between:

Smt. Rukmini Sangam, Wo.Late S Gopinath^{Aged about 72 Yearc,Occ Retd} Employee R/o. Flat No.101, Mathai's residence^{Chanakyapuri,Safilguda,} GRP Secunderabad

Sri. Sangam Mukund Rao, Sio. Late S Gopinath^{Aged about 53 Years, Occ} Pvt Employee R/o. Flat No.'101, Mathai's resrdence^{Chanakyapurt, Safilguda,} GRP Secunderabad

3 Smt.sangam Saritha, Wo. S Mukund Rao^{Aged about 43 Years,Occ: House} Wife R/o, Flat No.101 , Mathai's residence Chanakyapuri,^{Safilguda,GRP} Secunderabad

Sri. Sangam Murali, S/o. Late Goprnath^{Aged about 51 Years,Occ. Pvt} Employee R/o. Flat No.101, Mathai's residence^{Chanakyapuri,Saftlguda,} GRP Secunderabad

Smt. Sangam Rajamani@Rajni, Wo. Sri^{S Murali Aged about 43 Years,Occ:} House Wife R/o. Flat No-101, Mathai's^{residence Chanakyapuri,Safilguda'} GRP Secunderabad

Smt. Chitralekha, Wo. Sri K Sunil Ramlal^{Aged aboul 42 Years, Occ Pvt} Employee R/o. Flat No.101, tt/athai's^{residence Chanakyapuri,Safilguda,} GRP Secunderabad

7, Smt. Anupama, Wo. Sri Gopal Aged about^{49 Years, Occ.House WifeR/o.} Flat No.101, lvlathai's residence Chanakyapuri,^{Safilguda,GRP} Secunderabad

... Petitioners/Respondent^{Nos.2, 3} ,4,^{5, 6, 8 & I}

AND

.1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad

Smt. Archana Sangam, w/o. Late Mukesh^{SangamAged about 41 Years,} Occ. Pvt Employee R/o. H.No.^{18-4-716,lnianbowliGandhi Nagar.} F alaknuma. Hyderabad....

. Res pondents/Com plainant

t/

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 proceedings in DVC No 16112022, on the file of the Hon'ble lll N/etropolitan l/agistrate, at Hyderabad, wherein petitioners/respondents have been arrayed as Respondents for the alleged offences U/S. 19, 20,21 & 22 of DVC Act.

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2026

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the fi/lemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay all further proceedinqs in DVC No.161i2022 on the file of the Hon'ble III lVletropolitan l\ilagistrate, at Hyderabad, including appearance of . petitioners/respo nde nts, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

This Petrtion comrng on for hearing, upon perusing the l\Iemorandum of Grounds of Crrmrnal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Ms. Aishwarya Nalacheru, representing Sri Jeeripothula Srinivas, Advocate for the Petrtioners and Srr Jrthender Rao Veeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2

The Court made the following: ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO

CRIMINAL PETITION No.l544 of 2026

Date209.02.2026

Between

Smt Rukmini Sangam and 6 others

...petitioners/respondent Nos.2 to 6, 8 and 9

AND

The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad and another.

...respondents

ORDER

This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to^quash the

proceedings in D.V.C.No.161 of 2022, on the file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, at Hyderabad, wherein the^petitioners were arrayed as respondent Nos. 2 to 6, 8 and 9 for the offences

under Sections 19,20, 2l and22 of the Domestic^ViolenceCase

(for short'DVC') Act.

2

Heard Ms. Aishwarya Nalacheru, leamed counsel representing Mr. J.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioners through video conference and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional public prosecutor for respondent Nos.l and 2.

Though the cr.irninal petition was filed seeking to quash the ploceedings in D./.C.No. l6l of 2022, the leamed counsel for the petitioners restricted his prayer requesting this Court to dispense with the appearance of thc petitioners/respondent Nos. 2 to 6, g and 9 in D.V.C.No.l6l ol 2022, on rhe file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, at tJyderabad.

The leamed Additional public prosecutor has not opposed the submission made b1, the leamed counsel for petitioners.

In view of tlie above submissions, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the presence of the petitioners/rcspondent Nos.2 to 6, g and 9 in D.V.C.No.l61 of 2022, on thc file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, at Hyderabad. is d$oensed u,ith, subject to the condition that the petitioners/respondent Nos. 2 to 6, g and 9 shall be represented bv

J

their counsel on every date of hearing, unless their presence is specifically required during the course of the trial. In the event of non-appearance of petitioners/respondent Nos. 2 to 6, g and 9

on any date so fixed by the trial Court, the trial Court shall be

entitled to proceed with the matter in accordance with law.

6 Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed of.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shalt stand

closed

SD/. S.MALLIKAJUNA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

CTION OFFICER

To,

1 The I I I tVletropolitan [\4ag istrate, Hydera bad

2 Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

One CC to Sri-Jeeripothula Srinivas, Advocate [OPUC]

4 Two CD Copies

AI]K /PSL

&,

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0910212026

ORDER

CRLP.No.1544 of 2026

h t: s T4
<'
it .j
f ( 3 tiAll ) n,)\ ;a
':i,v*
Pi\ f,:-.1:'

DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION

JKs >qf -l> e