APHC010459812026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7670/2026 Between: 1. SHAIK MAHABUNNISA ALIAS MAHABOOBI, YEARS, W/O MAHAMMAD KHASIM,MUSLIM, HOUSE WIFE, D.NO.8 3-229/E/13 VENKATAGIRI, YUSUFGUDA HYDERABAD, TELANGANA STATE-500045 KHAIRATABAD, 2. SHAIK MHAHAMMAD KHASIM, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, THANGELLA, MUSLIM, VENKATAGIRI YUSUFGUDA, KHAIRATABAD, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA STATE- 3. SHAIK ALIAS AKAVEETI MUMTHAJ BEGUM, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,W/O MASTHAN VALI, MUSLIM, HOUSE WIFE, D.NO.5 3/50 KOBALTPET STREET GUNTUR 4. SHAIK ALIAS AKAVEETI MASTHAN VALI, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O KHASIM PEERA,MUSLIM, SPF HEAD CONSTABLE NO. 1283WORKING IN SUNNIPENTA, SRISILAM PROJECT, D.NO.5 3/50 KOBALTPET STREET, GUNTUR 5. SHAIK KHASIM VALI, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, S/O.MAHAMMADKHASIM, VENKATAGIRI, YUSUFGUDA, TELANGANA STATE- 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE 3rd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7670/2026 K MAHABUNNISA ALIAS MAHABOOBI, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, W/O MAHAMMAD KHASIM,MUSLIM, HOUSE WIFE, D.NO.8 229/E/13 VENKATAGIRI, YUSUFGUDA HYDERABAD, TELANGANA 500045 KHAIRATABAD, SHAIK MHAHAMMAD KHASIM, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, THANGELLA, MUSLIM, RTD. EMPLOYEE, D.NO.8-3 VENKATAGIRI YUSUFGUDA, KHAIRATABAD, HYDERABAD, -500045 SHAIK ALIAS AKAVEETI MUMTHAJ BEGUM, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,W/O MASTHAN VALI, MUSLIM, HOUSE WIFE, D.NO.5 3/50 KOBALTPET STREET GUNTUR S AKAVEETI MASTHAN VALI, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O KHASIM PEERA,MUSLIM, SPF HEAD CONSTABLE NO. 1283WORKING IN SUNNIPENTA, SRISILAM PROJECT, D.NO.5 3/50 KOBALTPET STREET, GUNTUR SHAIK KHASIM VALI, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, S/O.MAHAMMADKHASIM, MUSLIM, D.NO.8-3-229/E/1/4/A/I, VENKATAGIRI, YUSUFGUDA, KHAIRATABAD, HYDERABAD, -500045. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3504] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, W/O MAHAMMAD KHASIM,MUSLIM, HOUSE WIFE, D.NO.8- 229/E/13 VENKATAGIRI, YUSUFGUDA HYDERABAD, TELANGANA SHAIK MHAHAMMAD KHASIM, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, S/O 3-229/E/13 VENKATAGIRI YUSUFGUDA, KHAIRATABAD, HYDERABAD, SHAIK ALIAS AKAVEETI MUMTHAJ BEGUM, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,W/O MASTHAN VALI, MUSLIM, HOUSE WIFE, D.NO.5-60- S AKAVEETI MASTHAN VALI, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O KHASIM PEERA,MUSLIM, SPF HEAD CONSTABLE NO. 1283WORKING IN SUNNIPENTA, SRISILAM PROJECT, D.NO.5-60- SHAIK KHASIM VALI, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 229/E/1/4/A/I, HYDERABAD, ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI. 2 MRK,J Crl.P.No.7670 of 2026 2. SHAIK RAJIYA BEGUM, 26 YEARS, W/O SHAIK MAHAMMAD BASHA, D/O SHAIK KHASIMVALI AR CONSTABLE, MUSLIM, HOUSE WIFE, PRESENTLY RESIDING IN HER PARENTS HOUSE, HOUSE BESIDE10/1052-2-3, NEAR JAGADEESHWARI CINEMA HALL, NAGULAVARAM ROAD, 10TH WARD, MARKAPUR,-523316. MARKAPURAM DIST ...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 pleased to quash the proceedings in petitioners/A2 & A6 in D.V.C.No.16/2025 on the file of the Court of the Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Markapur, Prakasam District as against the petitioners herein and pass 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 grant stay of all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioners/A2 & A6 in D.V.C.No.16/2025 On the file of the Court of the Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Markapur, Prakasam District, pending disposal of the criminal petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. SRIDHAR TUMMALAPUDI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 3 MRK,J Crl.P.No.7670 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/respondent Nos.2 to 6 therein, seeking to quash the proceedings in D.V.C.No.16 of 2025 on the file of the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Markapur. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. 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 his argument to the extent of dispensing with the presence of the petitioners herein 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, 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 4 MRK,J Crl.P.No.7670 of 2026 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. In Vishal Shah Vs. 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. 12022 LiveLaw (SC) 594 22025 Live Law (SC) 240 5 MRK,J Crl.P.No.7670 of 2026 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/respondent Nos.2 to 6 before the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Markapur, in D.V.C.No.16 of 2025 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 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. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J Dated: 03.09.2026 MDP