APHC010336352026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE 5th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5364 OF 2026 Between: 1. Beesetti Siva Sai Venkat, S/o Parasuramulu, Aged 31 years,R/o House No.5-12-90/A, Burlupeta, Near MRO office,Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District-535001. 2. Beesetti Parasuramulu, S/o Sanyasi, Aged 60 years,R/o House No. 5-12-90/A, Burlupeta, Near MRO office, Vizianagaram,Vizianagaram District. 3. Beesetti Bhramaramba, W/o Parasuram, Aged 50 years,R/o House No.5-12-90/A, Burlupeta, Near MRO office,Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 4. Boddeda Devika, W/o Surya Prakash, Aged about 36 years,R/o Flat No.C3, BSN Residency, Kota Veedhi,Near Jagannadha Theatre Anakapalli Anakapalli District. 5. Boddeda Surya Prakash, S/o Sanyasi Naidu, Aged about 42 years,R/o Flat No.C3, BSN Residency, Kota Veedhi, Near Jagannadha Theatre,Anakapalli, Anakapalli District. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by Public Prosecutor,High Court Buildings, Amaravati. 2 2. Beesetti Doddi Rohini Durga, W/o Beesetti Siva Sai Venkat,D/o Doddi Chandra Sekhar, Aged 25 Years,R/o 7-126, NGOs Colony, Near Sai Baba Temple,Kotturu, Anakapalli, Presently residing at houseNo. 5-12-90/A, Geetanjali Apartment, Pudimadaka Road ...Respondents 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 Courtpleased to quash the DVC in D.V.C. No. 5 of 2026 on the file of the Hon’ble Court of the XI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate Cum I Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Anakapalle and pass such other order or orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 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 pleased to stay all further proeeedings including the appearance in DVC in D.V.C. No. 5 of 2026 on the file of the Hon’ble Court of the XI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate Cum I Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Anakapalle, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition and pass such other order or orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case Counsel for the Petitioners: BONU RAMA SHANKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Counsel for the Respondents:G RAMA GOPAL 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5364 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, seeking to quash the proceedings in DVC. No. 05 of 2026 on the file of the learned XI Additional Metropolitan magistrate cum I Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Anakapalle, filed under section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent- State. 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 before the trial Court by submitting petitioners’ practical constraints in attending before the trial Court and states that petitioners shall not dispute his 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 4 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 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 12022 LiveLaw (SC) 594 5 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 petitioners herein before the learned XI Additional Metropolitan magistrate cum I Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Anakapalle in DVC.No. 05 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 appear, when the trial 2 2025 Live Law (SC) 240 6 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: 05.08.2026 JAK 7 155 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5364 of 2026 Date: 05.08.2026 JAK