THUMPTI PREMAKUMARI v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,
CRLP/6416/2021 · 2025-01-28
V Sujatha
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 30725 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 30725 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
APHC010443842021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6416/2021 Between: Thumpti Premakumari and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):
1. K SUBRAHMANYAM Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following:
2
ORDER:
The Criminal Petition, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed by the petitioners/A.2 and A.5 to A.10, to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.160 of 2021 on the file of the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ponnur.
2. A charge sheet has been filed against the petitioners herein and others for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 498-A, 506 & 509 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners, after arguing for some time, confined his argument to the extent of dispensing with the presence of petitioners before the trial Court in terms of interim order passed by this Court on 05.05.2022.
4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor contended that there are specific accusations as against the petitioners herein and the truth or otherwise can be decided only during the course of trial.
5. Heard. Perused the record.
6. The material on record goes to show that there are specific accusations made against the petitioners herein. Truth or otherwise of the accusations has to be decided only during the course of trial. It is premature for this Court to conduct a roving enquiry into the disputed questions of fact in a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and quash the proceedings. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of the learned
3
counsel for the petitioners, presence of petitioners 1 to 7 i.e., A.2 and A.5 to A.10, before the trial Court is dispensed with, except on those dates when the learned Magistrate feels the presence of petitioners/A.2 and A.5 to A.10 is necessary.
7. Accordingly, with the above direction, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.
__________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 28.01.2025 KGR