1 APHC010503032026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE 23rd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8473 OF 2026 Between: 1. K.C.Jeevarathnam, S/o. Late K. Chinnayulu Reddy,Age 33 years, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Balaiah Kothuru Village, Thungundram Post, G.D. Nellore Mandal, Chittoor District-517421 2. K. Munemma, W/o. Late K. Chinnayulu Reddy,Age 65 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o. Balaiah Kothuru Village, Thungundram Post, G.D. Nellore Mandal, Chittoor District-517421. 3. K.Gnanendra Reddy, S/o. Late K. Chinnayulu Reddy, Age 39 years, R/o. Balaiah Kothuru Village, Thungundram Post, G.D. Nellore Mandal, Chittoor District-517421. 4. K.Geetha, W/o. K. Gnanendra Reddy,Age 33 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. Balaiah Kothuru Village, Thungundram Post, G.D. Nellore Mandal, Chittoor District-517421. 5. K.Kesavulu Reddy, S/o. Late K. Chinnayulu Reddy, Age 35 years, R/o. Balaiah Kothuru Village, Thungundram Post, G.D. Nellore Mandal, Chittoor District-517421. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh At Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. A Renuka, W/o. K. Jeevarathnam Reddy Jeevarathnam, D/o. A. Narasimhulu, Aged about 34 years, R/o. Gattu Village, B. Kothakota Mandal, Annamayya District-517370. ...Respondents 2 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 direct the Respondent No.5 to receive and register the Document No.P28/2026, dated 09 09-2026 ie., General Power of Attorney executed by Petitioner No.1 in favour of Petitioner No.2 on 07-09 2026, pending disposal of the above writ petition, IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 grant stay all further proceedings including appearance of the Petitioners herein (Respondents in DVC) in DVC No.36 of 2026 on the file of the Court of the Hon’ble Additional-1 Judicial First Class Magistrate, Madanapalle in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioners: P SRILATHA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following order: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8473 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: Instant Criminal Petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to Section 482 of Cr.P.C, has been filed on behalf of the petitioners herein, seeking to quash the proceedings in DVC No.36 of 2026 on the file of the learned Additional-1 Judicial First Class Magistrate, Madanapalle, for the offences punishable under Section 12 of the Prevention of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 2. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and Sri K. Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1-State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, after arguing for some time, has confined her argument to the extent of dispensing with the presence of the petitioners before the trial Court by submitting petitioners’ practical constraints in attending before the trial Court and states that petitioners shall not dispute their identity at a later stage of proceedings. 4 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor contended that specific accusations have been made as against the petitioners herein and truth or otherwise of the said accusations has to be decided during the course of trial, hence, there are no grounds to quash the proceedings at this stage. So far as dispensing with the presence of the petitioners before the trial Court, he has not opposed the same. 5. Since there are specific accusations that have been made as against the petitioners herein, which are all disputed questions of fact, the same can be decided during the course of trial, and this Court, in a petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 corresponding to Section 482 Cr.P.C., would not be in a position to conduct roving enquiry into the disputed questions of fact and quash the proceedings at this stage. 6. In this context, it is apt to note the dictum held in State of Uttar Pradesh and Another Vs. Akhil Sharda and Others1, by the Apex Court in its vivid terms in the following way: 7. Having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court by which the High Court has set aside the criminal proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it appears that the High Court has virtually conducted a mini trial, which as such is 1 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 594 5 not permissible at this stage and while deciding the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. As observed and held by this Court in a catena of decisions no mini trial can be conducted by the High Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., jurisdiction and at the stage of deciding the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court cannot get into appreciation of evidence of the particular case being considered. 7. In Vishal Shah Vs. Monalisha Gupta & Ors.2, Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that there is no requirement for the personal appearance of any party in the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, because they are quasi-criminal in nature and do not entail any penal consequences, except when there is a breach of a protection order, which is the only offence provided under Section 31 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein. However, due to ground realities submitted by the counsel for the petitioners, presence of the petitioners herein before the learned Additional-1 Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mandapalle, in DVC No.36 of 2026 is hereby dispensed with, except on those dates when the learned trial Court feels that their presence is necessary. In the event of failure of the petitioners to 2 2025 Live Law (SC) 240 6 appear when the trial Court specifically directs, this Order shall stands automatically revoked, without recourse to this Court. 9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. 10. Needless to state that the petitioners are at liberty to raise all the grounds before the trial Court. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. ____________________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 23.09.2026 krk 7 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM 135 CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8473 of 2026 Date: 23.09.2026 krk