' APHC010202562024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3094 OF 2024 Between: 1. Sheik Dadapeer, S/o Dantham Miya, aged about 65 years, R/o Bellammandi street, Kadapa Town, YSR Kadapa District. 2. Sheik Mansoor, S/o Chand Basha, aged about 65 years, D.No. 7-254- 1, Dasthagiri moda, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. ...Petitioners/a2 & A3 AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by Public Prosecutor, through Disha Womens U/G Police Station, Kadapa District, High Court at Amaravati. 2. Mayana Asma Khanam, W/o Sajid Ali Khan, Aged about 32 years, D.no. 14/705-19/1, Nakash Street, Kadapa town, YSR Kadapa District. ...Respondent Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash all further proceedings in C.C.No.1001 of 2023 before the before Special Judicial Magistrate of 1 Offences Court, Kadapa against the petitioners/A2 & A3 . St Class Proh. & Excise o— lA NO: 2 OF 2024 ^ ^ Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay of all further proceedings in C.C.No.1001 of 2023 before the before Special Judicial Magistrate of 1 Excise Offences Court, Kadapa against the petitioners/A2 & A3. St Class Proh. & This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Ms. Konnepalli Lakshmi Devi, Advocate for the Petitioners and of the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 The Court made the following ORDER: APHC010202562024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THb HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3094/2024 Between; 1.SHEIK DADAPEER, S/0 DANTHAM MIYA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,R/0 BELLAMMANDI STREET, KADAPA TOWN, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. SHEIK MANSOOR, S/0 CHAND BASHA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, D.NO 7-254-1, DASTHAGIRI MODA,KADAPA,YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, KADAPA THROUGH DISHA WOMENS Ll/G POLICE STATION DISTRICT,HIGH COURT AT AMARAV.ATI. 2.MAYANA ASMA KANAM, W/0 SAJID ALi KHAN, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, D.NO. 14/705-19/1, NAKASH STREET, KADAPA TOWN, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1.KONNEPALLI LAKSHMI DEVI Counsel for the Respondent/complainantfS): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER The instant Criminal Petition under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, ^ 973 has been filed, by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 seeking to quash t ie proceedings against them in C.C.No.1001 of 2023 on the file of the Court Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Prohibition & Excise, Kadapa for the offences under Section 2 read with 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 and Section 120-B read with 34 IPC. / 2. Ms.K.Lakshmi Devi, learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the offences alleged against the Petitioners are not attracted against them 2 since Sections 3 and 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 are applicable against Accused No.1 only. Learned counsel wouid further submit that the Petitioners acted as witnesses and they are not part of the crime. Learned counsel finally prays for quashment of the case against the Petitioners. Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor O. vehemently opposed the petition stating that the Petitioners having knowledge that it is a crime, have taken part by acting as witnesses to the said Talaq which is not permissible. It is submitted that the matter requires investigation at the full length of trial. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition. 4. At this juncture, learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the presence of the Petitioners before the trial Court may be dispensed with. 5. Considering the submissions made, it is not a fit case for quashment as conspiracy is also alleged against the Petitioners. The matter required trial before the trial Court. 6. In that view, the Criminal Petition is disposed of without causing any prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Petitioners. However, the presence of the Petitioners before the trial Court is dispensed with, except on the specific dates as directed by the trial Court. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed Sd/- K J RAJA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR A //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1. The Special Judicial Magistrate of 1"' Class Proh. & Excise Offences Court, Kadapa. To, c 2. The Station House Officer, Disha Womens U/G Police Station, Kadapa District. 3. One CC to M/s. Konnepalli Lakshmi Devi Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies sree * t I HIGH COURT DATED:29/07/2025 ORDER CRLP NO. 3094 OF 2024 andh^% 2=> s 17 SEP 2025 m Co ^ ^ Current Section ^^ ★ P^spatch^ DISPOSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION