APHC010508242023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI p TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7708 OF 2023 Between: 1. Chennareddygari Rajasekhar Reddy, S/o. Rama Gopal Reddy, Aged 34 R/o, D.No. 13/882-10-5-1, Near Sri Chaitanya School, Kalavadagga Street, Tadiparti Town, Ananthapuramu District. 2. Chennareddygari Adi Lakshmamma @ Adi Lakhsmi, W/o. Rama Gopal Reddy, Aged 58 Years, R/o. D.No. 13/882210-5-1, Near Sri Chaitanya School, Kalavadagga Street, Tadiparti Town, Ananthapuramu District. 3. Chennareddygari Rama Gopal Reddy, S/o. C. Venkata Reddy, Aged 62 R/o. D.No. 13/882-10-5-1, Near Sri Chaitanya School, Years, Years Kalavadagga Street, Tadiparti Town, Ananthapuramu District. 4. Santhigari Rajeswari, W/o. S. Gopinath Reddy, Aged 33 Years, R/o. Jupally, Homseh Apartments, Shashadri Nagar, Community Hall, Kukatpalli, Hyderabad. D.No.5-3-428/2185, Flat No.101 ...Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, (S.H.O Tadipatri Rural Police Station, Ananthapuram District) Rep. by Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Guntur District. 7 2. Vempalli Sreevani, W/o. Rajasekhar Reddy, Aged 30 Years, tSanjeevanagar, 1 Anantapuram District. R/o. St Cross Tadipatri Town, Tadipatri Mandal ...Respondents 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 the C.C. No. 1260 of 2023 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class Tadipatri, Ananthapuram District against the petitioners/Accused No. 1 to 4. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 stay of all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioners/Accused No. 1 to 4 in C.C. No. 1260 of 2023 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class Tadipatri Ananthapuram District pending the criminal petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: Smt. Marella Radha Counsel for the Respondent No.1 iPublic Prosecutor Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : Sri S Krishna Reddy The Court made the following order: APHC010508242023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] F TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7708/2023 Between; 1.CHENNAREDDYGARI RAASEKHAR REDDY, S/0. RAMA GOPAL REDDY, AGED 34 YEARS, R/0, D.NO. 13/882-10-5-1, NEAR SRI CHAITANYA SCHOOL, KALAVADAGGA STREET, TADIPARTI TOWN, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. 2.CHENNAREDDYGARI ADI LAKSHMAMMA @ ADI LAKHSMI, W/0. RAMA GOKIREDDY, AGED 58 YEARS, R/0. D.N0.13/882210-K-1, NEAR SRI CHAITANYA SCHOOL, KALAVADAGGA STREET, TADIPARTI TOWN, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. 3.CHENNAREDDYGARI RAMA GOPAL REDDY, S/0. C. VENKATA REDDY, AGED 62 YEARS, R/0.D.NO.13/882-10-5-1, NEAR SRI CHAITANYA SCHOOL, KALAVADAGGA STREET, TADIPARTI TOWN, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. 4.SANTHIGARI RAJESWARI, W/0. S.GOPINATH REDDY, AGED 33 YEARS, R/0. D.NO.5-3-428/2185, FLAT NO.101, JUPALLY, HOMSEH APARTMENTS, SHASHADRI NAGAR, COMMUNITY HALL, KUKATPALLI, HYDERABAD. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED{S) AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, (S.H.O TADIPATRI RURAL POLICE STATION, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT) REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.VEMPALLI SREEVANI, W/0. RAJASEKHAR REDDY, AGED 30 YEARS, R/0. SANJEEVANAGAR, 1®^ CROSS, TADIPATRI TOWN, TADIPATRI MANDAL, ANANTAPURAM DISTRICT, POLICE STATION BAPATLA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1.MARELLARADHA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1.S KRISHNA REDDY ^9 2 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed by the Petitioners / Accused Nos,1 to 4, seeking quashment of proceedings against them in C.C.No.1260 of 2023 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tadipatri for the offences under Sections 498-A and 506 of read with 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. Ms.Marella Radha, learned counsel for the Petitioners would that, except bald and omnibus allegations, there are no specific allegations against the Petitioners. Learned counsel would further submit that the Petitioners are falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel would submit that there is not even a single alleqation submit in soenifir gn?!inQt • ^ .... Petitioner/Accused No.4, who is a married sister of Petitioner / Accused No.1 to connect her with the alleged offences and that she has never resided under one roof along with the family of Accused No.1 and Respondent No.2. Therefore, continuation of criminal proceedings against the Petitioners is an abuse of process of law. 3. Per contra, Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, would submit that there are specific allegations made against the Petitioners and the truth or otherwise of the said allegations has to be decided during trial and the proceedings against the Petitioners at this stage cannot be quashed. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition. 3 At this stage, learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the presence of the Petitioners / Accused Nos.2 and 3 before the trial Court may be dispensed with. None appeared for Respondent No.2. 4. 5. As seen from the complaint, Petitioner/Accused No.4 is the married 6. sister of Accused No.1 and she has been residing along with her family. Except stating that the Petitioner/Accused No.4 along with other Accused harassed Respondent No.2 demanding additional dowry, there are no allegations against her, in specific. There are no instances of any kind of harassment by the Petitioner/Accused No.4. Further, it is not the case of Respondent No.2 that the Petitioner / Accused No.4 lived along with the family of Accused No.1 and Respondent No.2 under one roof. All the allegations are made against Accused Nos.1 to 3, who is the husband and parents-in-law of Respondent No.2. In the absence of any specific overt acts against the Petitioner/Accused No.4, this Court is of the view that continuation of proceedings against her is an abuse of process of law. Therefore, it is a fit case for quashment of the proceedings against the Petitioner/Acc used No.4 by exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. However, there are certain allegations against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 and the veracity of the said allegations has to be decided during the course of trial, but not at this stage. In result, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed and the proceedings against Petitioner/Accused No4 in C.C.No.1260 of 2023 on the file of the 7. 4 Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tadipatri, are hereby quashed. The proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall continue. However, the presence of the Petitioners / Accused Nos.2 and 3 before trial Court is dispensed with, except on the specific dated as directed by the learned trial Judge. the Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- A VIJAYA BABU ASSISTANT^^^STRAR SECTION OFFICER 1. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tadipatri, Ananthapuram District. 2. The Station Ananthapuram District. 3. One CC to Smt. Marella Radha, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri. S Krishna Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh Amaravathi [OUT] 6. Two CD Copies //TRUE COPY// To, House Officer, Tadipatri Rural Police Station, at Stu sree HIGH COURT DATED:02/09/2025 ORDER CRLP NO. 7708 OF 2023 2 3 SEP 2025 ) ^ ^SiaTT**** Sectignx^'^ -i ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION IN PART