APHC010514252026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE 29 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8654/2026 Between: 1. VADLAMUDI SAINADH, S/O.LATE V. KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED 38 YRS, R/O. YERRA KONDA DHOWLESWARAM VILLAGE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM RURAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P, 533125. 2. VADLAMUDI MISSAMMA ALIAS SATYAVATHI, W/0 LATE KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED 61 YRS, R/O VILLAGE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM RURAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P, 533125. 3. NETHALA VENKATA LAKSHMI, W/O.HARIBABU AGED 47 YRS, H.NO. 7-6-40, R/O RAMALAYAM STREET, SAMARLAKOTA VILLAGE EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 4. NETHALA HARI BABU, S/O NETHALAKONDAYA, AGED 50 YRS, H.NO. 7-6-40, R/O RAMALAYAM STREET, SAMARLAKOTA VILLAGE, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITSPUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, 2. VADLAMUDI DIVAYA REKHA, W/O.VADLAMUDISAINADH, YRS, R/O. VIPPARTHI VARI PETA, SOMPALLI VILLAGE, MANDAL DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT, IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE 29th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8654/2026 VADLAMUDI SAINADH, S/O.LATE V. KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED 38 YRS, R/O. YERRA KONDA DHOWLESWARAM VILLAGE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM RURAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P, VADLAMUDI MISSAMMA ALIAS SATYAVATHI, W/0 LATE KRISHNA AGED 61 YRS, R/O YERRA KONDA DHOWLESWARAM RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM RURAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P, 533125. NETHALA VENKATA LAKSHMI, W/O.HARIBABU AGED 47 YRS, 40, R/O RAMALAYAM STREET, SAMARLAKOTA VILLAGE EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 533440. NETHALA HARI BABU, S/O NETHALAKONDAYA, AGED 50 YRS, 40, R/O RAMALAYAM STREET, SAMARLAKOTA VILLAGE, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 533440. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITSPUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH NELAPADU, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, VADLAMUDI DIVAYA REKHA, W/O.VADLAMUDISAINADH, YRS, R/O. VIPPARTHI VARI PETA, SOMPALLI VILLAGE, MANDAL DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT, A.P IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3504] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM 20-828/1, AGED 38 YRS, R/O. YERRA KONDA DHOWLESWARAM VILLAGE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM RURAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P, VADLAMUDI MISSAMMA ALIAS SATYAVATHI, W/0 LATE KRISHNA YERRA KONDA DHOWLESWARAM RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM RURAL, EAST GODAVARI NETHALA VENKATA LAKSHMI, W/O.HARIBABU AGED 47 YRS, 40, R/O RAMALAYAM STREET, SAMARLAKOTA VILLAGE 533440. NETHALA HARI BABU, S/O NETHALAKONDAYA, AGED 50 YRS, 40, R/O RAMALAYAM STREET, SAMARLAKOTA VILLAGE, 533440. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITSPUBLIC NELAPADU, AGED 30 YRS, R/O. VIPPARTHI VARI PETA, SOMPALLI VILLAGE, RAZOLE A.P-533242 2 MRK,J Crl.P.No.8654 of 2026 ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): 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 quash the proceedings against the petitioners/A1 to A4 in C.C.No.17 of 2024 on the file of the Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Razole, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District against the petitioners/A1 to A4 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 to stay all further proceedings, including personal appearance of the petitioners/A1 to A4 in C.C.No.17 of 2024 on the file of Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate of First, Razole, DR. BR. Ambedkar Konaseema District Pending disposal of the Criminal Petition, Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. SUDHEER KUMAR ATTALURI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 3 MRK,J Crl.P.No.8654 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: Instant Criminal Petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023, has been filed on behalf of the petitioners herein (A1 to A4), seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.17 of 2024 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Razole, wherein they were charged with the offences punishable under Sections 85 and 115(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. K.Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, after arguing for some time, has confined his argument to the extent of dispensing with the presence of the petitioners (A1 to A4) 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. 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 herein, before the trial Court, he has not opposed the same. 4 MRK,J Crl.P.No.8654 of 2026 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 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. 7. 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 petitioners herein (A1 to A4) before the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First 12022 LiveLaw (SC) 594 5 MRK,J Crl.P.No.8654 of 2026 Class, Razole, in C.C.No.17 of 2024 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 appear, when the trial Court specifically directs, this Order shall stand automatically revoked, without recourse to this Court. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. 9. Needless to state that the petitioners are at liberty to raise all the grounds before the trial Court. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J Dated: 29.09.2026 MDP