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

HIGH COURT FOR STATE OF TELANGANA
K. LAKSHMAN, J
Ainpudi Ramkrishna – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


ORDER:

The presenr Criminal petition is filed under Secrion _ 4g2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for shorr ,Code',) to quash the proceedings in D.V.C. No.l60 of 2021 on the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. The petitioners herein are respondents in the said DVC. The said DVC is filed by respondent No.2 herein under -

Section 12 of the Protection of women from Domestic violence Act, 2005 (for short 'Act, 2005') against the petitioners seeking various reliefs.

2-

Heard learned counser for the petitioners and the leamed Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.l -

State.

Perused the record.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners herein never harassed the 2nd respondent as alleged by her in the complaint. The 2"d respondent talsely implicated the petitioners in the present case. He rvould firrther submit that l'1 petitioner herein is husband,/R. l, 2nd petitioner is mother of R.1. There are no allegations, much less specific allegations against the petitioners. In view of the same, he sought to quash the proceedings in the said DVC by dispensing with their presence before the trial Court.

4.

On the other hand,

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top