APHC010213782022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 3260 of 2022 Between: A.G. Rajeswaaramma and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. KIRAN KUMAR BALIGAMSETTI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. MANGENA SREE RAMA RAO 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed, by the Petitioners seeking to quash the Proceedings against them in DVC No.11 of 2019 on the file of the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Gudur, Nellore District, 2. Heard Sri B.Kiran Kumar, learned counsel for the Petitioners, Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1/State and Sri Mangana Sree Rama Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the material on record. 2 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the Petitioners herein are the family members of the husband of respondent No.2 and they are arrayed as respondents 2,4,5,9 and 10 in DVC No.11 of 2019 filed by Respondent No.2. Petitioner No.1 is the mother-in-law of respondent No.2. Petitioners 2 and 4 are the sons of Petitioner No.1. Petitioner No.3 is the wife of Petitioner No.2. Petitioner No.5 is the wife of Petitioner No.4. Further, the marriage of respondent No.1 with the younger son (A.Hari Prakash) of Petitioner No.1 herein was solemnized on 19.08.1994. Learned counsel would submit that the allegations levelled against the Petitioners are false, baseless and without making out any specific overtacts against them. The Petitioners have nothing to do with the offence. Further, the respondent with an ulterior motive and malafide intention to harass and cause inconvenience to the Petitioners filed the DVC with all false and frivolous allegations. 4. Learned counsel would further submit that the presence of the Petitioners may be dispensing with before the trial Court and the Criminal Petition may be disposed of by giving liberty to the Petitioners to raise such contentions before the trial Court in defence. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 3 6. Considering the submissions made, the Criminal Petition is disposed of and the Petitioners are at liberty to raise the present contentions before the Trial Court in their defence. 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. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.3260 of 2022 27.01.2025 Mjl /*