Telangana High Court
Rabia vs The State Of Telangana on 30 August, 2022
Author: Chillakur Sumalatha
Bench: Chillakur Sumalatha
THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.644 OF 2022
ORDER:-
1. Heard the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing Respondent No.1. Despite of service of notice upon Respondent No.2, none appeared on her behalf.
2. Seeking the Court to quash the proceedings that are pending against the petitioner who is arrayed as Accused No.2 in C.C.No.9312 of 2021, on the file of the Court of V Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, the present Criminal Petition is filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence and as the petitioner is the mother of accused No.1, her daughter- in- law foisted a false case against her alleging that she committed offence punishable under Section 498-A and 506 IPC. Learned counsel states that no further orders in this Criminal Petition are required except to dispense with the personal appearance of the petitioner before the trial Court as the petitioner is an aged woman. 2
Dr.CSL,J Crl.P.No.644 _2022
4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor did not raise any objection for grant of such relief.
5. Having regard to the said submission made and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court considers it desirable to order exemption from personal appearance of the petitioner/Accused No.2 during the course of trial proceedings.
6. Resultantly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of with the following directions:
(1) The Court of V Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, is directed not to insist upon personal appearance of the petitioner/Accused No.2 during the course of proceedings in C.C.No.9312 of 2021 that is pending on the file of the said Court, in case the petitioner/Accused No.2 is represented by an Advocate.
(2) However, it is made clear that the petitioner/Accused No.2 shall make her appearance as and when specifically directed by the trial Court to do so.
7. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA Dt.30.08.2022 ysk 3 Dr.CSL,J Crl.P.No.644 _2022 THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA CRIMINAL PETITION No.644 OF 2022 Dt.30.08.2022 ysk 4 Dr.CSL,J Crl.P.No.644 _2022 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MAIN CASE No:CRL.P.No.7182 of 2022 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. DATE ORDER OFFICE NOTE No.
1. 10.08.2022 Dr.CSL,J Tr. to IO folder before corrs.
CRL.P.No.7114 of 2022 Heard the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that despite of an order from this Court in W.P.No.31142 of 2022 and registration of deed of adoption, a false case is registered against the petitioners and therefore, the petitioners approached this Court for quash of proceedings.
In the light of the said submission, the Criminal Petition is admitted.
Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor waives notice for Respondent No.1 Issue notice to Respondent No.2 through Court process.
List on 19.10.2022.
_________ Dr.CSL,J I.A.No.1 of 2022 This is an application filed seeking the Court to stay all further proceedings in Crime No.132 of 1 (2014) 8 SCC 273 5 Dr.CSL,J Crl.P.No.644 _2022 2022 of Veenavanka Police Station, Karimnagar District.
contd...2 -2- Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the child in question was given in adoption through valid means. But a false case is foisted against the petitioners and in case the petitioners are arrested, the petitioners would be put to serious hardship.
Learned counsel seeks indulgence of this Court to direct the police to follow the procedure established under law.
Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor did not raise any objection.
Therefore, the present Interlocutory Application is disposed of with the following directions:-
(1) The Station House Officer, Veenavanka Police Station, shall not effect arrest of the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 without following the procedure established by law. (2) The Station House Officer, Veenavanka Police Station/Investigating Officer shall adhere to the requirement to follow Section 41-A Cr.P.C, except under the circumstances mentioned under Sections 41(1) and 41-A (4) Cr.P.C. (3) The guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar 1 shall be 6 Dr.CSL,J Crl.P.No.644 _2022 followed.
(4) The Station House Officer/Investigating Officer shall not insist upon the personal appearance of the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 during the contd...3 -3- course of investigation, except where their personal appearance is required. (5) In case the personal appearance of the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 is required, the same shall be communicated to them in writing indicating the reasons for which their personal appearance is sought.
(6) However, it is made clear that the Investigation may go on.
(7) That the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall cooperate with the police during the process of investigation.
_________ Dr.CSL,J ysk 7 Dr.CSL,J Crl.P.No.644 _2022 8 Dr.CSL,J Crl.P.No.644 _2022