G. Santosh v. State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY CRIMINAL PETITION No.11873 of 2015 ORDER:

This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/respondents 1 to 5 in D.V.C.No.167 of 2015 on the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State.

3. A perusal of the record reveals that the petitioners are respondents No.1 to 5 and the second respondent is the petitioner in DVC No.167 of 2015. A perusal of the record reveals that the second respondent filed a petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act against the petitioners claiming reliefs under the Act.

4. As per the principle enunciated in Valisetti Chandra Rekha v. State of Andhra Pradesh[1], Mohit Yadam v. State of Andhra Pradesh[2] and Mohd. Akber Yaseen v. Rizwana Sultana[3], the reliefs sought under Sections 18 to 22 of the Act are purely civil in nature and there is no element of criminality.

5. In the instant case also the reliefs sought by the second respondent are purely civil in nature without any element of criminality. Whether the second respondent is entitled to claim reliefs against the petitioners or not has to be decided during the course of trial only. If this Court expresses any opinion touching the merits of the case, the same will cause prejudice to either of

the parties. In such circumstances, the maintainability of the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is very much doubtful.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also the principle enunciated in the cases cited supra, I am of the considered view that it is not a fit case to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/respondent Nos.1 to 5 in DVC.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are facing much difficulty to attend the trial Court on each and every date of adjournment. Hence, their presence may be dispensed with.

8. There is no dispute with regard to the identity of the petitioners. Even if the presence of the petitioners is dispensed with, no prejudice would be caused to the second respondent.

9. Hence, the presence of the petitioners, who are respondent Nos.1 to 5 in D.V.C.No.167 of 2015 on the file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Erramanzil, Hyderabad, is hereby dispensed with on each and every date of adjournment. However, the petitioners shall appear before the trial Court as and when their presence is so required.

10.

With the above observation, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

11. Consequently, Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

_____________________ T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J Date: 17.11.2015

Rns [1] 2010 (2) ALD (Crl.) 689 (AP) [2] 2010 (1) ALD (Crl.) 1 (AP) [3] 2010 (2) ALD (Crl.) 680 (AP)