SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 21664

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
K SREENIVASA REDDY
POOJARI VENKATA RAMANA – Appellant
Versus
STATE REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR – Respondent
CRLP 4352/2023



APHC010288952023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3327]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4352/2023 Between:

1. P OOJARI VENKATA RAMANA, S/O. LATE VENKATA RAMANA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/O. HORSELY HILLS, B.KOTHAKOTA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

2. P OOJARI NARAYANAMMA, W/O. VENKATA RAMANA, AGED ABOUT

61 YEARS, R/O. HORSELY HILLS, B.KOTHAKOTA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

3. P OOJARI NAGARAJU,, S/O. VENKATA RAMANA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, RESIDING AT D.NO. FLAT NO.420, VR MEADOWS APARTMENTS, MARGONDANAHALLI, BOMANASANDRA, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE.

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)

AND

1. S TATE REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, REP. BY IT'S PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, AMARAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH.

2. C HOKKAKULA SUDHA, W/O.POOJARI RAMESH, D/O. VENKATA RAO, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O KATAKAPALLI VILLAGE, KOTHAVALSA MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):

Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.110 of 2021 on the file of the Court of the Honourable Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kothavalsa and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the certified copy of to dispense with the certified copy of the Charge Sheet in C.C.No.110 of 2021 for the alleged offences under 498A. 406 r/w IPC and Section 3.4 and 6 of Dowry prohibition Act, 1961, on the file of Honourable Judicial Magistrate of First Class. Kothavals Vizianagaram District. in the interests of justice.

IA NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in C.C.No.110 of 2021on the file of the Court of the Honourable Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kothavalsa including dispensing with the presence of the petitioners. pending disposal of the Criminal Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

1. VUBBARA DUSHYANTH REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY Criminal Petition No.4352 of 2023

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to

4 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.110 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kothavalsa, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity ‘IPC’) and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for brevity ‘the DP Act, 1961’).

2. Brief facts of the case are that, 2nd respondent/de facto complainant, a resident of Katakapalli Village, Vizianagaram District, came into acquaintance with A1 during her Intermediate studies in the year 2014–2015, and A1 proposed to marry her. On 01.03.2015, A1 along with A4 took 2nd respondent/ de facto complainant to Madanapalli without the knowledge of her parents and on 04.03.2015 performed marriage with her at Sri Venkateswara Swamy Temple in the presence of A2 to A4. Thereafter, 2nd respondent/de facto complainant started residing with A1 and her in-laws, and her family members provided cash and gold ornaments at the time of marriage and subsequent occasions. It is alleged that after some time A1 and the other accused subjected 2nd respondent/de facto complainant to mental and physical harassment and demanded money on several occasions. The parents of 2nd respondent/de facto complainant were alleged to have paid various amounts, including Rs.2,00,000/-, to meet the demands of A1. Due to the alleged ha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top