1 APHC010107332021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1704/2021 Between: 1. N. HAREESH BABU @ HAREESH REDDY,, S/O NARASIRNHA TEDDY, AGED 37 YEARS, OCC SR. RESIDENT RADIOLOGIST, R/O PANTUPALLI VILLAGE, PAKALA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2. SNIT. N. REDDEMMA,, W/O NATASIRNHA REDDY, AGED 71 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O PANTUPALLI VILLAGE, PAKALA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. N. G. PRASAD REDDY,, S/O NEU-ASIMHA REDDY, AGED 39 YEARS, OCC SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/O PANTUPALLI VILLAGE, PAKALA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. SMT. P. HASAVENI,, W/O KRISHNA REDDY, AGED 41 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O 69, MUNIREDDY LAYOUT, NEAR PRAGATHI SCHOOL, BANGALORE NORTH, MAHADEVAPURA, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE. 5. P. KRISHNA REDDY,, S/O DORASWAMY REDDY, AGED 48 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O 69, MUNIREDDY LAYOUT, NEAR PRAGATHI SCHOOL, BANGALORE NORTH, MAHADEVAPURA, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, AMARAVATHI. FOR THE SHO, WOMEN POLICE STATION, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 2. KASIREDDY VISWA BHARATHI, W/O SIVA SHANKAR REDDY 2 HNO402 VIGNES TOWERS NEAR TELECOM NAGAR KURNOOL TOWN AND DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to quash the Proceedings in C.C.No.2516 of 2019 on the file of the Hon’ble Judicial First Class Magistrate ,Kurnool and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Order dispense with the filing of the Certified Copy of the CC.No.2516 of 2019 on the file of the Hon'ble Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kurnool and receive the Xerox copy of the same on record and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2021 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS 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/accused in C.C. No.25/6/2019 on the file of the Hon'ble Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kurnool, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. G R SUDHAKAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. MURALI LINCOLN 2. 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1704/2021 ORDER: The instant Criminal Petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) has been filed by the Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 to 5, seeking quashment of the proceedings pending against them in C.C.No.2516 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 420, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 3, 4 & 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. Heard Sri G.R.Sudhakar, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, Sri Murali Lincoln, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State is in attendance. 3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners brought to the notice of this Court that during the pendency of the subject crime, the Accused No.1 and the Respondent No.2 obtained divorce by mutual consent in F.C.O.P.No.78 of 2020 on the file of Family Court-cum-IV Additional District Court, Kurnool vide Order dated 18.03.2021. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners further brought to the notice of this Court that the Order would show that the Respondent No.2 has withdrawn all her allegations against her husband and it is left open to the Respondent No.2 to work out her remedies under provisions of D.V.C and without causing any prejudice to her claim of maintenance in D.V.C. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners would further submit that the Accused 4 No.1 herein is at liberty to defend such case as per the defence available to him. The Respondent No.2 herein reserving her right of claiming maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., as well as Section 25 of Hindu Marriage Act and Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act and no amount is paid as consideration for their settlement. In the light of the said terms agreed upon by both the parties in the mediation before the Mediator, Judgment and decree dissolving their marriage by mutual consent has been passed by the Court. 4. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 also fairly conceded the same. 5. In the light of the facts referred supra, now the Respondent No.2 has withdrawn all the allegations made against the husband, continuing criminal proceedings against the husband and his family members for the offences under Section 498-A, 420, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 3, 4 & 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act, which was not referred in F.C.O.P. No.78 of 2020, in the terms agreed between the parties, is mere abuse of process of law. In addition to that, a fair perusal of the material placed on record, would show that the Accused No.1 and the Respondent No.2 both are Doctors, Accused No.2 is the mother of Accused No.1, Accused No.3 is the brother of Accused No.1 who is working as Engineer in Bangalore, Accused Nos. 4 and 5 are the married sister and her husband. A cursory look at the contents of the complaint would show that the grievance of the Respondent No.2 against the Accused No.1 is that he is physically handicapped person and that was suppressed by the family. 5 6. In that view and in absence of any reference of this case in the terms agreed between the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that continuing the criminal proceedings against the husband and his family members would amount to a mere abuse of process of law. This Court further reiterates that Respondent No.2, as one of the petitioners in the mutual consent divorce petition, had agreed before the Mediator, which was also mentioned in the Judgment, while reserving her right to pursue her remedies under the provisions of the D.V.C., regarding maintenance, maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., as well as under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act for permanent alimony, and also under the provisions of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act.. 7. In that view, this Criminal Petition is allowed. The criminal proceedings pending against the Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 to 5, in C.C.No.2516 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 420, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 3, 4 & 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act, is hereby quashed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 21.11.2025. UPS 6 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1704/2021 Dated.21.11.2025 UPS 159