V IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3057 OF 2025 Between: 1. Medibiona Suresh Kumar, S/o. Jogarao, Age 28 years, R/o.D.No.1- 36/1/F/, Road No.6, Jawahar Colony, ChandaNagar, Hyderabad RR District, Telangana State. 2. Smt.Medibiona Kamala, W/o. Jogarao, Age 50 years, R/0.D.N0.1- 36/1/F/, Road No.6, Jawahar Colony, ChandaNagar, Hyderabad RR District, Telangana State. ...PETITIONER/A-2 to A3 AND 1. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, 2. Smt.Medibiona Vijaya, W/o. Ramesh Kumar, Age 32 years, Occ Govt. Employee, R/o.D.No.34-15-10, Sirli Veedhi, Gnanapuram Village and Mandal Visakhapatnam City, Andhra Pradesh. ...RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings for offences U/s Secs.498-A,109 IPC and u/s 3 and 4 of the D P Act, 1961, CC No. 135 / 2020 Bn the file of the Hon’ble I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Visakhapatnam I.A. NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 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 CC No. 135/2020 on the file of the Hon’ble I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Visakhapatnam This Petition coming on for hearing upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K B Ramanna Dora, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent The Court made the following :Order /' 2 \y CRLP. No.3057 of 2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION No.3057 OF 2025 ORDER: 1. The petitioners are arraigned as Accused Nos.2 and 3 in C.C. No.135 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, for the alleged offences under Sections 498-A, 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. nd 2. The 1®* petitioner is the brother of the Accused No.1 and the 2 petitioner is the mother of the Accused No.1 and petitioner No.1. It is alleged in the complaint that the 2"^ respondent and the 1®* accused acquainted with each other, while the 1®* accused was working as respondent was working as staff nurse at were nd a receptionist and the 2 Manipal Hospital during the year 2013-14. 3. It is stated in the complaint that the 2"'^ respondent and the 1®* accused were in love and after convincing the elders, they got married on 10.04.2014 at Visakhapatnam. It is alleged that an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- was paid in cash apart from 50 grams of gold ornaments. It is also stated that other marriage gifts worth Rs.3,00,000/- were given to the 1®* accused. The 2 respondent gave birth to a girl child on 23.09.2015. It is stated that the 2'"'^ respondent was harassed for the additional dowry by the petitioners. It is also alleged that the 1®^ accused developed illegal intimacy with the 4^'' accused. nd 4 3 CRL.P. No.: registered the crime the charge sheet, petitioner submits that the disputes respondent arose 4- On the strength of the and after completion 'earned counsel for the complaint, the police have of investigation, filed The between the on account of the alleged it is also not reveai the involvement of the offences. It is also submitted and that they accused and the 2"^^ 1 accused and the 2""^ intimacy between the submitted that the petitioners i that the petitioners interfered i 1 accused and the 4^^" accused. allegations do in commission of the alleged are residing at Hyderabad never in the marital disputes between the 1®* respondent. 5. Heard the submissions learned Assistant Public of the learned counsel for Prosecutor the petitioners and the appearing for the State. Perused the record. 6. The police in the course of i Of as many facts as investigation have as 9 witnesses. The listed wi recorded the statements Witnesses Nos.3 to 7 state the raised by the petitioner trial court after petition cannot narrated by the L.W. 1 are issues of fact which All the grounds would have to be decided by the a full-fledged trial. This Court i'n the present quash of the learned consider the submissions seeking the prayer of counsel for the petitioner 'n C.C. No. 135 of 2020 Judicial Magistrate quashing the proceedings of the I Additional Chief against the petitioners. on the file of the Court Visakhapatnam, / K 4 CRLP. No.3057 of 2025 With the above observation, the criminal petition is disposed of, leaving it open for the petitioners to raise all the grounds as raised in the quash petition before the trial court when the matter is taken up for trial. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this criminal petition shall stand closed. 7. 8. Sd/- M. PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, The 1 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. The Station House Officer, Women police Station, Visakhapatnam City. One CC to Sri K B Ramanna Dora, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Two CD Copies 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. RAM ? s' • - \ A HIGH COURT DATED :21/03/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.3057 of 2025 o. 0 3 SEP 2025 .09 \fS^ disposing the crlp