The High Court · 2025

Smt Rozy Kaur, Wo. Karandeep Singh, Aged about 39 years, Occ. House yyifg, R/o .at present H.No. 15, Star Home Sri Vansai Society, Kompally, Hyderabad. ... PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT AND

1. 2 The State of Telangana, Represented by its PP, High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad. Karandeep Singh, S/o- Rajinder Singh, Aged aboul 44 years, Occ. lT Professional working with Bank of America, 0/o. Rahela Mind Space Hi-tech City, Cyberabad, Manjeera Pipe Line Road, Madinagud-a, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for records in CC. No. 751 of 2014 and on a perusal of the same be pleased to quash the order dated 21-06-2023 passed in Criminal MP No. 330 of 2023 by the Court of the Vlll Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at Kukatpally. l.A. NO: 1OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the effect and operation of order dated 21-06-2023 in Criminal MP. No. 330 ot 2023 in CC. No. 751 ol 2014 by the Court of the Vttt Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at Kukatpally,. pending disposal of the main Criminal Petition. l.A. NO: 2OF 2025 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the Hlgh Court may be pleased to extend the interim orders dated 09.04.20115 in crl p.no.9454 of 2023 This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri ApURVA M GOKHALE, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri. E GANESH, Assistant public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No..l and Sri. iV GOVIND REDDY, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL PETITION No.9 454 0F 2023 ORD ER: The present Criminal petition is filed seeking to call for the records in C.C.No.7 5l of 2Ol4 and quash the order dated 21.06.2023 in Crl.M.p.No.33O of 2023 in C.C.No.75.1 of 2014 on the file of the learned principal Junior Civil Judge-cum_VIII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Kukatpall-v (for short. ,,the trial Court").

2. Heard Mr.Apurva M. Gokhale, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.E.Ga,esh, learned Assistant public prosecutor appearing for respondent No. l -State and Mr. M. Govind Redd,r,, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the marnage betr.r,een petitioner and respondent No.2 n as perform ed on 22 .1 1 . 1 998; that they were blessed with a female child during their wedlock; that after marriage the petitioner suffered harassment at the hands of respondent No.2 and his parents. Unable to bear such harassment, she filed C.C.No.751 of 2014 against respondent No.2 for the offences punishable under Sections 49g-A, 376(A) and 377 of Indian penal Code; a case under Section 498 A of \ 2 I.P.C. against accused Nos.2 and 3 before the competent criminal Court. While so, respondent No.2 filed a petition uncler Section 311 of Cr.P.C. seeking to re-call pW1 for further cross examination. The trial Court vide order dated 21 .06.2023 allowed the said application on payment of Rs.3,O0O7 - toward s costs. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred the present Criminal Petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner stLbmits that the calendar case was reserved for judgment on 1g.O3.2O23; that respondent No.2, on O1.06.2023, filed an a:plication under Section 31 1 of Cr.P.C. while giving notice to the rearned Assistant Public Prosecutor. He states that no notice was served upon the petitioner and the trial Court posted the casr: .for orders, on

21.06.2023. He contends that no reasonable opportunity of heuring u,as afforded to the petitioner to oppose the same and file counter affidavit; that the trial Court had passe,d the impugned order in a mechanical manner, without assigning valid reasons.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that this Court vide order dated 14.12.2022 in Crl.p.lIo.48O7 of 2022, set aside the orcler dated 27.06.2022 in Crl.M.P No.919 of 2022 in C.C.No.751 of 2Ol4 passed by the trial Corrrt r,r.herein and / ., whereby, the trial Court had allowed an application filed b-v respondent No.2 and others under Section 31 1 of Cr.P.C. seeking to reopen the evidence of PW1. Therefore, he contends that respondent No.2 had filed another application under Sectiorr 31 I of Cr.P.C. only to protract the litigation on one pretext or the other and the learned Judge of the trial Court had erroneousl_v allou,ed the same by imposing costs. Hence, he seeks to allou' the Criminal Petition.

6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that no prejudice will be caused to PWI if she is re-ca-lled once again lor the purpose of further cross examination. Therefore, he submits that interference of this Court is not warranted and seeks to dismiss this Criminal Petition. 7 . Having regard to the submissionq of both the learned counsel and on perusal of the order dated 14.12.2022 passeri br' this Court in Crl.P.No.4807 of 2022, it is apparent that this Court had already directed the trial Court to conclude the proceedings in C.C.No.75 I of 2074 expeditiously as the case pertains to the year, 2014. Therefore, the trial Court ought to have re-opened the calendar case if so required, for further arguments rather than passing the impugned order. Re-calling PW 1 for further cross .+ examination, after reserving the calendar case for judgment would ultimatel-v result in delay in dispensing jr-rstice. Hence, the order dated 21.06.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.330 of 2023 in C.C.No.751 of 2Ol4 on the lile of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge- cum-VIII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, l,ukatpally is set asicle. Resultantly, the trial Court is directed 1o dispose of the C.C.No.751 if 2014 as expeditiously as possible.

8. Accordingl.y, the Criminal Petition is allowerl Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shztll stand closed //TRUE COPYII \ SD/- N. RAJAGOPAL DEPUTY REGISTRAR ,i SECTION OFFICER To,

1. Principal JCJ-cum-Vlll Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, lianga Reddy District at Kukatpally.

2. The lX Metropolitan Magistrate, Kukatpally at Miyapur Cyberabad. 3. The Station House Officer, Miyapur P.S., Cyberabad. 4. One CC to SRI APURVA M GOKHALE Advocate [OPU]l 5. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Advocate [OUT] 6. One CC to SRI M GOVIND REDDY Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CD Copies MKN/ph U/ HIGH COURT DATED:0910612025 ORDER CRLP.No.9454 of 2023 0 $ 5EP 2025 ,i i. )' \\._ . J CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED