Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 53811 (AP)

MANGADEVI INABATHUNI v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

CRLP/9991/2023 · 2025-12-29

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010646642023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9991/2023 Between: MANGADEVI INABATHUNI, W/O. JITHA MANMADHA RAO, AGED 67 YEARS, R/O PLOT NO.3002, SAMADHURA APARTMENTS, NANAKRAMGUDA, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA STATE. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH SHO, AS NAGAR P.S., VIJAYAWADAS REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH 2. ABHINIKA RADHA KRISHNAN, W/O. TARUN INABATHUNI, AGED 36 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.4412, 4 TH BLOCK, 5 TH FLOOR, INDIRA ENCLAVE, AYODYANAGAR, VIJAYAWADA. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. ARUN SHOWRI G Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C has been filed by the Petitioner / Accused No.2, seeking quashment of the proceedings against her in S.C.No.200 of 2023 on the file of the Court of V Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Mahila Sessions Judge, Vijayawada for the offence under Sections 498-A read with 34 IPC. 2. Sri G.Arun Showri, learned counsel for the Petitioner / Accused No.2 would submit that, since Petitioner / Accused No.2 is old aged person, she 2 could not appear before the Court and file petitions for compounding the offences and to record the compromise. Learned counsel would further submit that, in the light of the quashment of the present case against Accused No.1, the case against the Petitioner, who is the mother of Accused No.1 may also be quashed. 3. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor is in attendance. 4. Respondent No.2 would submit that, at the instance of the elders, the differences between her and her husband i.e., Accused No.1 are amicably resolved and that they started living together along with their children. She would further submit that, she has no objection for quashment of the case against the Petitioner / Accused No.2. 5. Considering the submissions, in view of the quashment of the case against Accused No.1, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the Petitioner / Accused No.2 in S.C.No.200 of 2023 on the file of the Court of V Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Mahila Sessions Judge, Vijayawada, are hereby quashed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:30.12.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.9991 of 2023 Dt.30.12.2025 Dinesh