Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Kammara Raghavendra vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 9 May, 2023
26
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
MAIN CASE NO : Crl.P.No.3383 of 2023
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl. Date ORDER OFFICE
No. NOTE
BSB, J
1. 09.05.2023 I.A.No.1 of 2023
This petition is filed to grant stay of all further
proceedings in C.C.No.703 of 2023 (split up case from
C.C.No.359 of 2017) on the file of the Court of Judicial
Magistrate of First Class at Pattikonda, Kurnool
District including the execution of warrant and
proceedings under Section 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C., 1973
against the petitioner herein till the disposal of the
main quash petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner/A5 submitted
that originally the complaint was given against A1 to
A9 for the offence punishable under Sections 354,
504, 506, 498-A and 149 IPC in the FIR No.71 of 2013
dated 26.06.2013, however when the charge sheet
was filed, the case against A2 to A9 was dropped by
observing that the allegations were made against
them only to put them to trouble, but they have never
visited the village of defacto complainant, nor did they
harass her demanding additional dowry and thus, the
charge sheet was laid against A.1 only for the offence
under Section 498-A IPC.
Learned counsel further submitted that when
the defacto complainant filed a protest petition, her
statement was recorded by the Magistrate on
19.06.2017, basing on which the cognizance was
taken against A.1 for the offence under sections 498-A
and 323 IPC, whereas against the petitioner/A.5 for
2
Crl.P.No.3383 of 2023
the offence under Section 323 r/w 34 IPC without
recording any reasons, that too without any evidence
of the defacto complainant specifically stating about
the petitioner. In this regard, he further submitted that
the statement of defacto complainant is to the affect
that all the accused beat her with hands and legs all
over her body in the matrimonial home by Ganjahalli
village and there is no other evidence, however,
cognizance is not taken against other accused and
without there being any specific mention of the
petitioner, the cognizance was taken against the
petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submitted that no summon was received in this matter
after registration of the case and he recently came to
know that the trial Court is proceeding against the
petitioner by issuing proceedings under Section 82
and 83 of Cr.P.C. and all the proceedings against him
are mere abuse of process of law and that the
petitioner, since resided elsewhere working as a
coolie, was not even served any summons in this
case.
On considering the submissions and on perusal
of the record, the interim stay of all further
proceedings in C.C.No.703 of 2023 (split up case from
C.C.No.359 of 2017) on the file of the Court of Judicial
Magistrate of First Class at Pattikonda, Kurnool
District including the execution of warrant and
proceedings under Section 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C., 1973
against the petitioner herein, for a temporary period
can be granted till the next date of hearing i.e., on
20.06.2023.
Issue notice to the R.2/ defacto complainant.
3
Crl.P.No.3383 of 2023
Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted
to take out personal service of notice to the
respondent No.2/defacto complainant through RPAD
and file proof thereof.
Post on 20.06.2023.
_________________ B.S.BHANUMATHI,J Crl.P.No.3383 of 2023 Issue notice to the R.2/ defacto complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take out personal service of notice to the respondent No.2/defacto complainant through RPAD and file proof thereof.
Post on 20-06-2023.
_________________ B.S.BHANUMATHI,J SAB