Aruna Pachika, v. State Of Telangana,

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER CRIMINAL PETITION No.335 of 2017 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the record. Respondent No.1 filed D.V.C. No.75 of 2016 in the Court of IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, against the petitioners and four others. As per the record, the petitioners are residing at Warangal. It is inconvenient for them to attend the Court at Hyderabad. Respondent No.1 therein is appearing and perusing the said D.V.C.

In the order passed in Gaddameedi Nagamani v. The State of Telangana and others1, this Court held that no quash petition is maintainable against taking cognizance and proceeding with D.V.C. but only appeal lies under the relevant provision of law. Under the above circumstances, there are no merits to quash the proceedings in D.V.C.. However, personal appearance of the petitioners is dispensed with till disposal of D.V.C.. In case there is any requirement for their personal appearance, the learned Magistrate can order so.

With the above observation/direction, this Criminal Petition is disposed of.

1 2015(2) ALD (Crl.) 764 (AP)

Dr. SA, J Crl.P.No.335 of 2017 Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed in consequence.

____________________________ Dr. SHAMEEM AKTHER, J 13th OCTOBER, 2017.

kvni