The High Court · 2025

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lVrermorandum of Grounds of criminurl Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri G. Ravi chandran learned cr>rnsel representing Mr. Anand Kunrar, Advocate for the Petitioners and ther Assrstant public prosecutor (TG/Ap) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 :rnd sri Rupendra Mahendera, Advocare on beharf of the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following Order:- a !, THE HON'BLE SHRI .IUSTICE ANIL KUMAR TIUKANTI CRIMINAL PETITION No.897 of 2o25 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short tsNSS) by the petitioners/respondent Nos.2 and 3 to quash the proceedings against them in D.V.C.No.94 of 2024 pending on the frle of the learned I Additiona-I Junior Civil Judge-Cum-I Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.

2. Heard Mr. G.Ravi Chandran, learned qounsel representing Mr. Anand Kumar, learned counsel for petitioners, and Ms. S. Madhavi, Iearned Aslistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent - State. Perused the material on record.

3. Respondent No.2 hled a petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short, 'the DVC Act, 2005') and the said complaint was numbered as D.V.C.No.94 of 2024 on the fiIe of the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge-Cum-I Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar. IY 1,- t l 1 2 JAK, J CRLP 897 2025

4. It is ave:rred in the complaint that respondent No.2 is working .Lrr. a .p{v4te company and has night shifr-s and ' l'.-' reaches home at around O2:30 A.M. It is further aver:ed that petitioners here.in abuse her for not starting the domestic works at O6:O0 A.M. It.is a,lso averred that on the inst;:gation of petitioners, leer husband i.e., p.Venkata Hari Krishnar beats her and threal-ens her with dire consequences. It is stated that she hard.llr has proper rest/ sleep and there are no pleasant situations. That unable to bear mental and ptrysical harassment, a <:omplaint under Section D.V.C. Act. !)0O5'is lodged.

5. Learned counsel for petitioners (respondent Nos.2i and 3 in D.V.C.) subn:.itted that allegations are baseless, \\,ith an intention to harass the petitioners. It is submitted that no specific allegations of overt acts are made. The allegations with regard to the sharing of salary for home maintenalr:e ane false and that no case can be made out on mere allegations. It is also submitterd that petitioners are ready and willing r_o co- operate during the tria_l of the case, that they are aged above 55 years and their presence during the proceedings be r.ar:: 3 JAK, J oRLP 897 2025 dispensed with. It is urged that petitioners shall present themselves when required by Court. .4 v

6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 submits that at the time of marriage, some articles were given. and was performed on 24.02.2023 at Hyderabad. It is submitted that respondent No.2 is a hardworking lady, a private employee, that due to the night shifts, she comes home at 02:30 A.M. in the morning and by 06:00 A.M. petitioners herein wake her up and direct her to attend for domestic works. It is further submitted that'when respondent No.2 requested for little more rest and then would attend for domestic works, petitioners never h6eded to her request and used to harass her menta,lly and physically. It is also submitted that respondent No.2 used to contribute her salary for home maintenance. It is submitted that she was never allowed to have proper sleep/rest and was effecting her health. It is pointed out that at the instigation of petitioners, her husband used to harass her physically and mentally. That as the harassment became unbearable, she approached the Court arrd no interference is necessitated. i i. tY 4 JAK, J cttl-P 897 2025 T . Perused the record, considered the submissions 8 *lr.C.rrfo 4+'of zoz+ came to be filed by respondent No.2 a,lleging that petitioners instigate her husL>and by complaining t-eat she was not attending the domestir: chores, was taking rest and not sharing the salary for maintenance of home. It is a-1so stated that in spite of the night s;hifts she was attendir:Lg, to the domestic chores and contrib uting her sa-lary, yet bering harassed physically and mentally g. Be tha.t as it may, learned counsel for petitiriners submitted that petitioners are ready and willing to attend the proceedings zr.s and when necessary. Taking the subrnissions into consideration and age of both the petitioners, this Court is of the opinion that petitioners be permitted to atte:nd when the trial Court. deems it necessar5r that their prt:s;ence is required, herLce are permitted to attend when requirr:d by the Court. Their presence is dispensed with but on certain conditions.

10. It is made clear that petitioner Nos.1 and 2 herein (respondent Nos.2 and 3 in D.V.C.No.94 of 201).1) shall present therrrselves in court when summoned by Court, if ..^frj-*-.:-.---* k .iB-. 5 JAK, J 0RLP 89'.t 202s their presence is required. petitioner Nos. 1 arrd 2 herein shall Itle affidavit(s) that they will not dispute their identit5r and that p.4oceedi4gs_.can go on,in their absence, to be conducted by their counsel(s). Learned counsel(s) for petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 herein shalr represent before the trial court without fail on ali dates. Petitioner Nos. I arld 2 herein shall not dispute the proceedings conducted in their absence. This order shal stand vacated automatically, if petitioners fail to attend the proceedings as and when summoned and also when the counsel(s) representing petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 fatl to attend Court proceedings on any of the dates. Any oU""*.tior," made in this sha_ll not influence the trial Court while ,order consideiing or concluding the case at the time of trial.

11. Accordingly, this Criminal petition is disposed of. Miscellaleous applications pending, if any, shall stald closed. To, Sd/- P. PADMANABHA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFICER '1. The I Additional Junior CiviI Judge-cum-l Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Rangareddy District at L. B, Nagar.

2. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT].

3. One CC to Sri M. Anand Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri Rupendra Mahendera, Advocate [OPUC] 5 Two CD Copiesw v(' _ 'j--.!+:]:..+ .;!ffi{:. HIGH COURT .4 v DATED:0510212025 ORDER CRLP.No.897 of 2025 ,...rt jfl?5 cI ,t /.-;-L o, BI, I t) \ DISPOSING OF THE CRLP a,', r