Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Ananthaneni Radha vs The State Of Telangana on 9 April, 2021
Bench: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Hemant Gupta
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.391 OF 2021
(Arising out of SLP(crl.) No.1727/2021)
ANANTHANENI RADHA Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF TELANGANA Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The factual situation which emerges is that the complainant wife and her husband were both based in Australia and apparently could not get along and it is her case that there were demands of dowry from the husband and family members. The complainant came to India but was not able to return to Australia on account of the husband not facilitating the visa.
The husband filed a divorce proceedings in Australia Signature Not Verified and though the complainant was served and filed a Digitally signed by ASHA SUNDRIYAL Date: 2021.04.15 18:05:24 IST Reason: response, she could not participate in those proceedings on account of inability to travel to Australia in the absence of the visa. Faced with this situation, the 2 complainant filed a divorce petition in India. It is her say that this is so as the foreign divorce is not valid in India.
The aforesaid facts show that both the husband and wife seek a divorce albeit the wife seeks a divorce from Indian Court and has made certain allegations against the husband. The appellant has been roped in as the lady who has subsequently married the husband of the complainant after the divorce decree was passed by the Australian Court.
The only controversy before us is that the passport of the appellant has been deposited before the trial Court and the appellant is being prevented from travelling to Australia as a consequence thereof. She seeks return of her passport to facilitate her travel to Australia.
In the conspectus of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the passport should be returned to the appellant so that she can travel to Australia but she will ensure that she participates in the criminal proceedings either through herself or a duly authorised representative and as and when called upon to appear in person she will also make necessary arrangements for appearance before the trial Court. 3 The appeal is accordingly allowed and the impugned order is set aside leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
……………………………………………..J [SANJAY KISHAN KAUL] ………………………………………………J [HEMANT GUPTA] New Delhi;
April 09, 2021.
4
ITEM NO.29 Court 9 (Video Conferencing) SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1727/2021
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 03-02-2020 in CRLP No. 8329/2019 passed by the High Court For The State Of Telangana At Hyderabad) ANANTHANENI RADHA Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF TELANGANA Respondent(s) Date : 09-04-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Mullapudi Rambabu, Adv.
Mr. N. Eswara Rao, Adv.
Ms. Prity Kumari, Adv.
M/S. M. Rambabu And Co., AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Bina Madhavan, Adv.
Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, AOR Ms. Sweena Nair, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
(ASHA SUNDRIYAL) (POONAM VAID) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
[Signed order is placed on the file]