Criminal Appeal No. 4228 of 2010 · Andhra Pradesh High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA
Provisions considered
Judgment
Petitioners-A4 and A5 seek quashing of the proceedings initiated against them in D.V.C.No.5 of 2010 on the file of the XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar. Brief facts of the case are that the 2nd respondent herein gave a report before the Project Director, District Women & Child Agency, R.R. District against the petitioners herein and three others under the provisions of Protection of Women-cum-Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and the same was taken on file as D.V.C.No.5 of 2010 by the XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B. Nagar. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners herein, who are arrayed as A4 and A5, filed the present petition seeking to quash the said proceedings. Heard both sides. Accused No.1 in the aforesaid D.V.C. is the husband of the 2nd respondent. A2 and A3 are parents of A1. Petitioner No.1 herein (A4) is sister of A1 and petitioner No.2 herein (A5) is husband of A4 and they are residing in United States of America. Having regard to the fact that the petitioners herein are residing in U.S.A., the allegation made against them in the complaint appears to be not correct and that the 2nd respondent with a mala fide intention filed the present Domestic Violence Case against the petitioners herein also. Hence, this Court has no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the proceedings initiated against the petitioners herein are nothing but an abuse of process of the Court and as such the said proceedings are liable to be quashed in so far as the petitioners herein are concerned. The Criminal Petition is accordingly allowed and the proceedings initiated in D.V.C.No.5 of 2010 on the file of the Court of XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, are hereby quashed in so far as the petitioners-A4 and A5 are concerned. However, the Court below is at liberty to proceed with the case in so far as other accused are concerned, in accordance with law. _______________________________
(GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J)
07.07.2010 Gsn.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.