Telangana High Court
Geddam Jhansi vs The State Telangana And Another on 3 February, 2022
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K. Lakshman
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
CRIMINAL PETITION No.1002 OF 2022
ORDER:
The present Criminal Petition is filed under Section - 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Code'') to quash the proceedings in D.V.C. No.25 of 2021 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhongir,Yadadri Bhongir District. The petitioner herein is respondent No.3 in the said DVC. The said DVC is filed by respondent No.2 under Section - 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short 'Act, 2005') against the petitioner and others seeking various reliefs.
2. Heard G.V.Shivaji, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 - State.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that respondent No.2 has filed D.V.C. case one year after her deserting her husband's company as a counter blast to I.D.OP No.44 of 2021 filed by her husband against her for divorce. The contents of the petition filed under Section - 12 of the Act, 2005 do not make out any prima facie case against the petitioner herein. Respondent No.2 has implicated the petitioner in the above case and in Crime No.54 of 2021 of Bhongir Women Police Station with an intention to harass petitioner and other accused and she is misusing and abusing the process of Court. In view of the same, he sought to quash the KL,J Crl.P. No.1002 of 2022 2 proceedings in the said DVC by dispensing with her presence before the trial Court.
4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that there are specific allegations made against the petitioners by respondent No.2 in the complaint filed under Section - 12 of the Act, 2005 about the harassment, both physically and mentally meted out to respondent No.2 by the petitioner and others in relation to additional dowry and that the petitioner shall co-operate in concluding the trial before the Court below. In view of the same, he sought to dismiss the present petition.
5. Perusal of the record would reveal that petitioner is the maternal aunt of husband of respondent No.2. The petitioner is running a Non-Governmental Organization (N.G.O.) and has been residing at Hyderabad. The allegation alleged against the petitioner is that she harassed respondent No.2, both physically and mentally for additional dowry. In view of the same, prima facie, there are specific allegations made against the petitioner and the same have to be decided only after inquiry.
6. In this regard, it is apt to refer to the decision rendered by a learned Single Judge of High Court of Judicature for the States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh in Giduthuri Kesari Kumar v. State of Telangana1, which is as under:
"14) To sum up the findings: 1 . 2015 (2) ALD (Crl.) 470 (AP) KL,J Crl.P. No.1002 of 2022 3 i) Since the remedies under D.V Act are
civil remedies, the Magistrate in view of his powers under Section 28(2) of D.V Act shall issue notice to the parties for their first appearance and shall not insist for the attendance of the parties for every hearing and in case of non-appearance of the parties despite receiving notices, can conduct enquiry and pass exparte order with the material available. It is only in the exceptional cases where the Magistrate feels that the circumstance require that he can insist the presence of the parties even by adopting coercive measures.
ii) In view of the remedies which are in civil nature and enquiry is not a trial of criminal case, the quash petitions under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. on the plea that the petitioners are unnecessarily arrayed as parties are not maintainable. It is only in exceptional cases like without there existing any domestic relationship as laid under Section 2(f) of the D.V. Act between the parties, the petitioner filed D.V. case against them or a competent Court has already acquitted them of the allegations which are identical to the ones leveled in the Domestic Violence Case, the respondents can seek for quashment of the proceedings since continuation of the proceedings in such instances certainly amounts to abuse of process of Court."
7. In the present case, the petitioner who is maternal aunt of husband of respondent No.2 and running N.G.O. at Hyderabad. However, the contention of petitioner that she has been staying at Hyderabad, it would be difficult for her to attend the Court on each KL,J Crl.P. No.1002 of 2022 4 date of hearing can be considered and, accordingly her presence before the Court below in the above DVC has to be dispensed with.
8. In view of the above discussion and the observations made by the learned Single Judge in the aforesaid decision, the present Criminal Petition is disposed of, dispensing with appearance of the petitioner-respondent No.3 in D.V.C. No.25 of 2021 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhongir only. However, the petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate as and when her presence is required.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Criminal Petition shall stand closed.
_________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J 03.02.2022 Nvl