Sriram Dasaiah v. State of Telangana

#1. Sriram Dasaiah, S/o. Late. Pullaiah, Aged about 72 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H. No.2-24, Kothaguda Village and Mandal, lvlahabubabad Districl 506135.

#2. Sriram Lilavathi, Wo. Dasaiah, Aged about 65 years, Occ. Household, R/o. H. No 2-28, Kothaguda Village and ft/andal, Mahabubabad District-506135. 3. Sriram Srinivas, S/o. Dasaiah, Aged about 52 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H. No. 2-28, Kothaguda Village and Mandal, Mahabubabad District-506 135 4. Sriram Sridevi, Wo. Srinivas, Aged about 45 years, Occ. Household Rio. H. No. 2-28, Kothaguda Village and l/landal, lvlahabubabad District-506135. 5. Jangala Shobha Rani,, Wo. Jangala Ravinder, Aged about 45 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o. H. No. 2-21, Kothaguda Village and lt/andal, Mahabubabad District-506135 .,.PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 TO 6 AND

#1. State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad

#2. Sriram Alias Gummadi Lalitha, Wo. Sriram Venkateshwarlu, Aged about 42 years, Occ. Government Teacher, R/o. Pakhala Road, Narsampet, Warangal Diskict506132. ...RESPONDENT/DEFACTO-COMPLAINANT 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 call for the records relating to proceedings in C.C. No. 294 of 2025 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil J udge-cum-Principal Judicial [Vlagistrate of First Class, Narsampet for the offences under Section 85, 82(1), R/w. 3(5) BNS and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and quash the same as illegal so far as the Petitioners/ Accused No. 2 to 6 are concerned or to pass necessary order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice ::-'r I l.A- NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under section 528 of BNSS praying that ir the circumstances stated in the [\Iemorandum of Grounds of criminal Petiti<:n the High court may be pleased lt is further prayed that this Hon'ble court ma'i t e pleased to stay of alt iurther proceedings in C C No. 294 of 2025 on the file o the Principal Junior civil Judge-cum-Principal Judicial lvlagistrate of First cla;s Narsampet for the offences under Section 85, B2(1), R/w 3(5) BNS anc r';ection 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, including the Appearance of the Petitione's pending disposal of criminal petition or to pass necessary order or orders as :l'lr; Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper tn the circumstances of the case, in th:: interests of justice' This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusinr- he l'/emorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the argun'e lts of sri GUNDALA KAIVALAKAR ,Advocate for the Petitioner and sri Mr V.Jilhr:nder Rao Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No1. anrl 'one appear for the Respondent No2. The Court made the following: ORDER ...-EF.!t THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11735 ot 2025 ORDER: This criminal petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.294 of 2025 against the petitioners- accused Nos.2 to 6 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge- cum-Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narsampet, for the offences under Sections 85 and 82 (1) rlw 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS') and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 'l 961 (for short 'DP Act')

#2. Heard Mr.Gundala Kamalakar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Publlc Prosecutor for the respondent No.1 -State.

#3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there are no specific allegations against the petitioners, who are the family members of accused No.1. lt is further submitted that the de facto complainant has never resided with them, nor have they harassed her in any manner. The allegations in the complaint also do not disclose any acts amounting to harassment. Hence, he prayed for quashing of the proceedings against the petitioners. 2 ,..:

#4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor subrn'tted that the statements of the independent witnesses do Sroint out the allegations against the petitioners herein. He, theref rre, prayed to dismiss the pet.ition.

#5. Perused the record

#6. The statement of the independent witness ir oluding LW-3 forms part of the record and the veracity of the: :ltatements of witnesses and their evidentiary value are matters to be tested during the course of trial by the trial Court. At ihis stage, this Court is not inr; lined to interfere, as there are spe, li 'ic allegations made against the petitioners. Therefore, it is a sr. bject matter of trial and requires proper adjudication 7. However, in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the presence of the pertil oners before the trial court is dispensed with provided .hirt they are represented by a counsel before the trial court or-l :)very date of hearing and shall appear before the trial court ,ru.renever their presence is required during the course of trial. B. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is disposerl ,rf. , ,,fr--.{ \ \ To, Miscellaneous Petitions pending' if any' shall stand closed. SD/- P.PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G- SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// Ii?..3i3,":B: i'r:],Jj,,?#l J uds e-cu m -P ri n c i pa I J ud i cia I M a g istrate 2' The Station House officer, porice station Narsampet warangar District 3 One CC to SRt GUNDALA KATVALAKAR Advocate tOpUCl 4. Two CC to SRt PUBLTC PROSECUTOR Advocate [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies AG/PSL \cv I { I I \. O l ii lct 20n HIGH COURT DATED:1 110912025 ORDER CRLP.No.11735 of 2025 CRLP IS DISPOSED OF 8c'{ir\ \L+- (d=-'" ),