APHC010669802022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9826 of 2022 Between: Kosuru Jhansi Lakshmi and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. GHANTASALA UDAYA BHASKAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2. K V ADITYA CHOWDARY The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731 has been filed, by the Petitioners/Respondents 2 to 4, seeking quashment of the Proceedings against them in DVC No.8 of 2022 on the file of the Court of II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 2. Heard Sri Ghantasala Udaya Bhaskar, learned counsel for the Petitioners, Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1/State and Sri K.V.Aditya Chowdary, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the material on record. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the marriage of respondent No.2 with the son (Kosuru Harsha) of Petitioners 1 and 2 herein was 1. For short ‘the Code’ 2 performed on 27.08.2021 at Veduka Kalyana Mandapam, Machilipatnam as per Hindu Rites and customs in the presence of elders. Due to disputes, respondent No.2 filed DVC No.8 of 2022 against her husband (Harsha-respondent No.1 in DVC), and Petitioners 1 to 3/respondents 2 to 4. Further, though the Petitioners herein were arrayed as respondents 2 to 4 in DVC, no relief is sought against them. Learned counsel would submit that the Petitioners herein are not residing along with respondent No.2 and prays for quashment of the case against the Petitioners. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 would submit that at the time of marriage, the father of the respondent No.2 gave Rs.50,00,000/- cash, 60 sovereigns of gold and adapaducu lanchanams. After the marriage, respondent No.2 came to know that her husband (arrayed as respondent No.1 in DVC) is impotent and intentionally cheated the respondent No.2 for the purpose of getting illicit money. Learned counsel would submit that there are disputed questions of fact, which cannot be decided in this Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code and prays for dismissal of the Criminal Petition. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that there is a verifiable material against the Petitioners, which needs full length of trial and it is not the stage to quash the Proceedings against the Petitioners. 6. At this stage, learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the presence of the Petitioners may be dispensed with before the Trial Court. 7. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 3 8. Considering the submissions made and in view of the fact that the Petitioners/Respondents 2 to 4 are the family members of respondent No.1 in DVC No.8 of 2022 i.e., husband of respondent No.2 herein, it is apposite to consider the request of the petitioners to dispense with the presence of the Petitioners before the Court below. 9. In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of dispensing with the presence of the Petitioners/Respondents 2 to 4 before the Trial Court, 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. 9826 of 2022 19.02.2025 Mjl /*