Mohammed Nayeemuddin v. The State of Telangana

The State of Telangana,, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

Smt. Tabassum Begum, Wo Sri Mohammed Nayeemuddin, aged 32 years, Occ. Housewife, No 10-2-34718/34, Flat No.105, Asif Nagar, Hyderdbad. ...Respondents Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the Petitioner/Accused No.'1 in C.C.No.2'19 of 2019 On the file of XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Xlll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad. l.A. NO: 1OF 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioners in C-C.No.219 of 2019 On the file of XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Xlll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad). This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K.S.S.Ayyubi ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the respondent no.2. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TTRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10605 of 2(t25 ORDER:- 1. This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha lianhitha, 2023 seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.219 of 2019, on the file of the learned Xlll Additional Crief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, registered for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of IPC.

2. Heard Mr.K.S.s.Ayyubi, learned courrsel for the petitioner/accused No.'l and Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor repres,:nting the 1't respondent-State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted tl'at the de facto complainant has lived with the petitioner herein only for a period of 13 months and that he never harassed the de facto cr:mplainant and that she left his society in2011 and lodged a compla nt in 2016 with a delay of 5 years and the FIR was registered aft,:r one year of lodging the complaint. He further submitted that therrr: is no demand for additional dowry even as per the allegations and hence, the offence under Section 498-4 does not get attra lted and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against him. He 1u(her submitted ! i i I i I I t I I I i I I I 2 that he has filed a Discharge Petition before the Trial Court which is \ pending adjudication.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed saying that when once the Discharge Petition is pending, the petitioner cannot proceed with the quash petition in parallel and that the delay cannot be counted in such cases since 498-4 is a continuous offence and he therefore prayed to dismiss the petition.

Perused the record. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the delay is not a point for consideration in the offences under Section 498-4 lPC. The submission of the leamed counsel for the petitioner itself discloses that a Discharge Petition is pending before the Trial Court. Thus, this petition cannot be entertained at this juncture and the same is liable to be dismissed.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed SD/. M. JAWAHAR REDDY S STANT REGISTRAR ,/TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To, 1 The Hon'ble XV Additional Chief lvletropolitan Magistrate (Xlll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad)'

2. one CC to Sri P.S.V. Prasad, Advocate [oPUC] 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad. [OUT] 'i

4. Two CD Copies HIGH COURT DATED:2110812025 l I I ORDER CRLP.No.10605 ot 2025 Irttr s 14 ,4' ll 2 t{ol, u (n^(' o C, t ]l :tj's oo \- TCH EO DISMISSING THE CRL.PETITION AS WITHDRAWN. .T ..dil &*