Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9378 OF 2021 Between:
1. Ainpudi Ramkrishna, S/o.Late Subba Rao , Aged about 56 years, Occ Business, 2. Ainpudi Lata, W/o Late Ainpudi Subba Rao, Aged about 78 years Occ Housewife. C/o.T.Yasodhara, Fl/o.Flat No. 40'l , Plot No. 13, 12 A and 12 B, Bhavya Balaji Towers, Venkateshwara Nagar, Near Sai Baba Temple, AS Rao
062.
Nagar, Hyderabad-sO0 ...PETITIONERS/ RESPONDENTS AND
1. State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana. Hyderabad.
2. Sree Lakshmi Garikipati, W/o Ainpudi Ramkrishna, D/o G.Kotaiah Chowdary, aged about 50 years, Occ Pvt. Employee.
3. Ainpudi Deepak, S/o Ainpudi Ramakrishna, Aged about 15 years, Occ Student, being minor rep by R2 Both are residing at H. No.7-1-58/3/201, Divyashakti -
Apartments,Opp Lal Bunglow, Ameerpet, Hyderabad 500 016 AND 0/o. Vilayawada Tollway (P) Ltd., D. No. 1-891,2rid and 3rd Floor, Plot No.42,43, Phase - l, Kavuri Hills, lt4adhapur, Hyderabad - 500 033.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the l\/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in DVC No.160/2021, on the file of the lll Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Hyderabad.
l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021 Petition under Section 482 ol Cr.P.C 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 including appearance of the petitioners, in DVC No.160/2021,On the file of lll Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Hyderabad, during the pendency of the above quash petition before this Hon'ble court.
This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri G. VASANTHA RAYUDU ,Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2 & 3
The Court made the following: ORDER /
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CRI\IINAL PETITION No.9378 of 2021 /
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, the leamed Assistant public prosecutor would submit that there are specific allegations made against the petitioners by the 2nd respondent in the complaint filed under Section -
b(the tZ Act, 2005 and that the petitioners shall co_operate in concluding the trial before the Court below. In view of the same, he sought to dismiss the present petition.
5. As per the contents of the petition filed under Section - l2 ol the Act, 2005, the mariage of R. I with the 2"d respondent was performed on .22.04.2004. After marriage, the petitioners herein started harassing the 2nd respondent.
6. In this regard, it is apt to refer to the decision rendered by a leamed Single Judge of High Court of Judicature for the States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh in Giduthuri Kesari Kumar v. State of Telanganar, which is as under:
"14)
To sum up the findings:
i) Since the remedies ufrder D.V. Act are civil rerredies, the Magistrate in view of his powers under Section 28(2) ol D.V Act shall issue notice to the parties for their first appearance and shall not insist for the attendance ol the parties for every hearing and in case of non-appearance ol the parties despite receiving notices. can conduct enquiry and It pass exparte order rvith the nlaterial ar,ailable. is only in the exccptional cases rvhere the Magistrate feels that the circumstance require that he can insist the presence of the parties even by adopting coercive measures.
ii) In view of the remedies which are in civil nature and enquiry is not a trial of criminal case, the quash petitions under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. on the plea that the petitioners are unnecessarily arrayed as parties are not maintainable. It is only in exceptional cases like
'-_-
)
without there existing any domestic relationship as laid under Section 2(0 of the D.V. Act between the parties, the petitioner filed D.V. case against them or ,.1 a competent Court has alreadl' acquitted them ol the allegations rvhich arc identical to the ones leveled in the Don-restic Violence Case, the respondents can seek lor quashment of the proceedings since continuation of the proceedings in such instances certainly amounts to abuse ofprocess of Court."
7 In the present case, the 2'd petitioner herein is aged mother of R.1, therefore, it is difficult for her to attend the Court on each date of hearing. Even the allegations made in the complaint against the petitioners herein are general in nature.
8. Considering the said facts and also in view of the principle laid down in the above judgment, this Court is inclined to dispense with the presence of the petitioners in the DVC proceedings.
9. In view of the above discussion, the plesent Crirninal Petition is disposed of, dispensing with personal appearance of petitioners herein in D.V.C. No.l60 of 2021 on
