s IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAV THURSDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY i TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE \ PRESENT I*-' or VSY' THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos: 10142 AND 9618 OF 2022 r? CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10142 OF 2022 Between: Gaddam Ratnakaran, S/o Paramanand (Late), Aged about 43 Flat No 101 1st floor Magi Apartment, Narayan Nagar, Chinchpada Ambarnath Dist, Thane, Maharastra. years, R/o ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by Public Prosecutor Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. 2. Gaddam Chaitanya Latha,, W/o Gaddam Ratnakaran D/o Doppalapudi jeeva ratnam. Aged about 35 years, R/o D.No 11-8-1/2a. Ramireddypet, Narasaraopet town and Mandal, Guntur District, High ...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 pleased to quash the D.V.C. application against Petitioner/Respondent No 1 in D.V.C. No. 16 of 2021 on the file of 1st Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Narasaraopet in the interest of Justice. I.A. NO: 2 OF 2022 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 the D.V.C. application against Petitioner/Respondent No 1 in D.V.C. No. 16 of 2021 on the file of 1st Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Narasaraopet in the interest of Justice. CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9618 OF 2022 Between: 1. Gaddam Suseela, W/o Paramanand (Late), Aged about 72 years, H.No 45/B Ordnance factory estate Ambarnath, O.e Ambarnath Thane, Maharastra 421502. 2. Gaddam Padmakaran,, S/o Paramanand (Late), Aged about 41 years, H.No 45/B Ordnance factory estate Ambarnath, O.e Ambarnath Thane, Maharastra 421502. 3. Gaddam Ratnaprabha,, W/o Manoj kumar mishra. Aged about 42 years, H.No 45/B Ordnance factory estate Ambarnath, O.e Ambarnath Thane, Maharastra 421502. 4. Ratna prabha Manoj Kumar Misra,, W/o Manoj Kumar Misra about 47 years, Occ. House Wife, R/c Chenab B7 Western Sector. Anushakti Nagar Mumbai, Maharastra 400094. 5. Gaddam Suvarthavar Aged i @ Suvarthavani Geoge Tenali years, R/o B-102 Perfect West, Thane D/o Paramanand (Late), Aged about 46 Apartment, Subhashvadi, Vandrapada, Ambarnath Maharastra 421501. 6. Jeorge Tenali Ramulu,, Aged about 45 years, R/o B-102 Perfect Apartment, Subhashvadi, Vandrapada, Ambarnath West Maharastra 421501. Thane ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS Nos.2 to 7 AND 1. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Courtof Andhra Pradesh. 2. Gaddam @ Doppalapudi Chaitanya Latha,, W/o Gaddam Ratnakaran, D/o Doppalapudi jeeva ratnam, Aged about 35 years, R/o D.No 11-8- 1/2a, Ramireddypet, Narasaraopet town and Mandal, Guntur District. ...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 pleased to quash the entire proceedings in D.V.C. No. 16 of 2021 on the file of on the 1st Additional Civil Judge at Narasaraopet, against the petitioners/Respondents No. 2 to 7. I.A. NO: 2 OF 2022 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 grant stay of all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioners/Respondents No.2 to 7, in D.V.C. No. 16 of 2021 on the file of on the 1st Additional Civil Judge at Narasaraopet, in the interest of Justice. This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri G N V PULLA RAO .Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on I behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri_SRI SRIVASTAVA Advocate for the Respondent No.2 The Court made the following ORDER : THATHIREDDY ASHOK if APHC010693502022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10142/2022 Between: Gaddam Ratnakaran ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.G N VPULLA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2.THATHIREDDY ASHOK SRIVASTAVA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9618/2022 Between: Gaddam Suseela and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused{S): 1.G N VPULLA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 2 'i 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2.THATHIREDDY ASHOK SRIVASTAVA 3 The Court made the following; ORDER; The instant petitions in under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 have been filed, by the Petitioners/respondent Nos.1 to 7 seeking quashment of the entire proceedings them in D.V.C.No.16 of 2021, on the file of learned Additonal Junior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet. 3. Heard Sri G.N.V.Pulla Rao, learned counsel for thp petitioners and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after marriage, respondent No. 2, who is the petitioner in D.V.C. No. 16 of 2021, stayed with her husband's family for three days. After three and a half years, she filed a D.V.C. case, as well as another criminal case against them for offenses punishable under Sections 498A, 3, and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The learned counsel further submits that respondent No. 7 in D.V.C. i.e., petitioner No. 6 herein, George Tenali Ramulu, has died. He also submits that there are no specific allegations made against the petitioners (i.e., family members of respondent No. 1) to attract the incidence of Domestic Violence. Respondent No. 2 is the mother, respondent No. 3 is the brother, respondent No. 4 is the sister, respondent No. 5 is the husband of respondent No. 4, and respondent No. 6 is another sister of respondent No. 1, who is the husband of the petitioner in the D.V.C. case. 5. Learned counsel would further submit that, except for mentioning their names in the report, alleging that they supported respondent No. 1, nothing specific has been attributed against them. Furthermore, a criminal case has also been lodged against them for the offense punishable under Section 498- A IPC. Continuing the present case against the husband’s family members is a mere abuse of the process of law. In addition to that all the reliefs claimed in the present petitions are directed against the husband. Learned counsel finally prays that the petitions may be allowed and the case against the petitioners be quashed Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that there are clear allegations against all the petitioners. The mother-in-law also filed DVC case against the respondent No.2. They have moved transfer petition which was allowed and tied along with the present case. Learned counsel would further submit that these petitions are liable to be dismissed. 6. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the contents of the petition filed by respondent No. 2 (the wife) under the Domestic Violence Act, all the allegations are directed at the husband. A casual reference made against the family members of the husband are omnibus in nature, stating that although she informed them about the husband's behavior, they continued to support him. As rightly put by the learned counsel for the petitioners, nothing specific has been attributed against them. Furthermore, while the reliefs claimed in the DVC are against the husband, the criminal case has been lodged against all the family members, with allegations of additional dowry demands. In that regard, continuing the DVC against the petitioners in CrI.P. No. 9618 of 2022 is unwarranted. 7. 5 In the result, Criminal Petition No.9618 of 2022 is allowed and Criminal 8. Petition No.10142 of 2022 filed by the husband is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- SK.MOHAMMED RAFI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECmON OFFICER To The I Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Narasaraopeta, Guntur District. 1. The Station House Officer, Narasaraopeta I Town Police Station, p.untur District. 2. ■a n 3. One CC to SRI. G N V PULLA RAO Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to SRI. THATHIREDDY ASHOK SRIVASTAVA Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi [OUT] 6. THREE CD COPIES RDB TAC i HIGH COURT DATED:02/01/2025 COMMON ORDER ?J JML 3075 . Current Section , O CRLP.Nos.9618 and 10142 of 2022 o s;. w ■fry CRLP.N0.9618 OF 2022 IS ALLOWED AND CRLP.NO.10142 OF 2022 IS DISMISSED