Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 15617
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
J. Sreenivas Rao, J
Dondeti Venkateshwarlu – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION No.6738 of 2026 | C.C.No.1040 of 2020
For the Appellants/Petitioners: V. Venu Madhav
For the Respondents: Jithender Rao Veeramalla
The court held that proceedings cannot be quashed when the grounds involve disputed facts; however, the personal appearance of an elderly and ailing accused may be dispensed with, provided they are represented by counsel.
Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure - Quashing of Proceedings - Disputed Facts - Where the grounds raised for quashing the proceedings are based on disputed facts, such issues must be adjudicated by the trial court after a full-fledged trial. (Para 3)
(B) Personal Appearance - Dispensation - Age and Health - The court may dispense with the personal appearance of an accused on grounds of advanced age and ailments, provided the accused is represented by counsel on every date of hearing. (Para 3, 5)
Issues: Whether the proceedings in C.C.No.1040 of 2020 should be quashed and whether the petitioner's personal appearance in the trial court could be dispensed with.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of the criminal petition to quash proceedings under the ipc. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. refusal to quash proceedings when grounds are based on disputed facts. (Para 3) |
| 3. dispensation of personal appearance for elderly and ailing accused. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
ORDER
This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1040 of 2020, on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam, wherein the petitioner was arrayed as accused, for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 384 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’).
2. Heard Mr. V. Venu Madhav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for respondent No.1.
3. Though the criminal petition was filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1040 of 2020, when this Court expressed a view that all the grounds which are raised by the petitioner are disputed facts and the same have to be decided by the trial Court after full-fledged trial. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court to dispense with the appearance of the petitioner/accused in C.C.No.1040 of 2020, on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam, on the ground that the petitioner is aged about 64 years, suffering with old aged ailments. Hence, it is very difficult for the petitioner to appear on each and every date of adjournment in the Trial Court, as such the learned counsel sought for dispensing with the presence of petitioner before the Trial Court.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has not opposed the submission made by the learned counsel for petitioner.
5. Taking into consideration of peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and also submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the presence of the petitioner/accused in C.C.No.1040 of 2020, on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam, is dispensed with, subject to the condition that the petitioner/accused shall be represented by his counsel on every date of hearing, unless his presence is specifically required during the course of the trial. In the event of non-appearance of petitioner/accused 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, shall stand closed.
