Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLP/8467/2026 of M Hymavathi Vs Palla Shanthi Kiran on 22 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE 23rd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8467 OF 2026 Between: 1. M Hymavathi, W/o. Late UmaMaheswara Rao, Aged 65 Years, Flat No. 202, Amma Residency,
::1::
APHC010502942026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
WEDNESDAY, THE 23rd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO
KUNCHEAM
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8467 OF 2026
Between:
1. M Hymavathi, W/o. Late UmaMaheswara Rao, Aged 65
Years, Flat No. 202, Amma Residency, Murali Nagar, Madhava Dhara, Vishkapatnam City.
2. M Naga Jyothi, W/o. Santhosh Adapa D/o. Late Umamaheswar Rao, Aged 38 years. Plot No. 618, Gokul Plots, Flat No. 402, 9 Phase, Venkataramana Colony, Kukatpally Hyderabad 500 072
3. Adapa Gana Santhosh, S/o. A. Thrinatha Rao, Aed 40 years.
Plot No. 618, Gokul Plots, Flat No. 402, 9 Phase, Venkataramana Colony, Kukatpallv Hyderabad 500 072
4. R Padmavathi, W/o. R. Devi Prasad, Aged 54 Years, R/o. D
No. 18-125/2, Chandra Nagar, Gopalapatnam, Vishakapatnam City.
...Petitioners
AND
1. Palla Shanthi Kiran, W/o. Masapu Hari Kishan D/o. Palla Achanna, Aged 37 Years R/o. H No. 76/97-SKDN-17-1, Srikrishnadevaraya Nagar, 0pp. Radio Station Peddapadu Road, VTC, SAP Camp Post, Kurnool City, Kurnool District Cell No. 97016 01561
::2::
2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Public Prosecutor,High Court Bldgs, Amaravati
...Respondents
Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528
of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Courtto call for the records relating to proceedings in DVC No. 56 of 2025 on the file of Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Prohibition & Excise, Kurnool under Sec. 9 (B) and Sec 37 (2)
(3) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 and quash the same as illegal in the interest of justice and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS
praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased grant on the file of Excise, Kurnool of Women from stay of all further proceedings in DVC No. 56 of 2025 Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Prohibition a under Sec. 9 (B) and Sec 37 (2) (3) of the Protection Domestic Violence Act 2005
including appearance of petitioners / Respondents No. 2 to 5
pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition i the interest of justice and to in pass Counsel for the Petitioners: A SREEDHAR
Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Counsel for the Respondents:
::3::
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8467 of 2026
This Court made the following
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:-
Instant Criminal Petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023, has been filed on behalf of the petitioners herein (A2 to A5), seeking to quash the proceedings in D.V.C.No.56 of 2025 on the file of the Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Prohibition & Excise, Kurnool, for the offences registered under sections 9 (B) and 37
(2) (3) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005.
2. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and Sri K. Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.2-State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, after arguing for some time, has confined his argument to the extent of dispensing with the presence of the petitioners before the trial Court by submitting petitioners’ practical constraints in attending before the trial Court and states that petitioners shall not dispute their identity at a later stage of proceedings.
::4::
4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor contended that specific accusations have been made as against the petitioners herein and truth or otherwise of the said accusations has to be decided during the course of trial, hence, there are no grounds to quash the proceedings at this stage. So far as dispensing with the presence of the petitioners before the trial Court, he has not opposed the same.
5. Since there are specific accusations that have been made as against the petitioners herein, which are all disputed questions of fact, the same can be decided during the course of trial, and this Court, in a petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 corresponding to Section 482 Cr.P.C., would not be in a position to conduct roving enquiry into the disputed questions of fact and quash the proceedings at this stage.
6. In this context, it is apt to note the dictum held in State of Uttar Pradesh and Another Vs. Akhil Sharda and Others1, by the Apex Court in its vivid terms in the following way:
7. Having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court by which the High Court 1 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 594
::5::
has set aside the criminal proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it appears that the High Court has virtually conducted a mini trial, which as such is not permissible at this stage and while deciding the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. As observed and held by this Court in a catena of decisions no mini trial can be conducted by the High Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., jurisdiction and at the stage of deciding the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court cannot get into appreciation of evidence of the particular case being considered.
7. In Vishal Shah Vs. Monalisha Gupta & Ors.2, Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that there is no requirement for the personal appearance of any party in the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, because they are quasi-criminal in nature and do not entail any penal consequences, except when there is a breach of a protection order, which is the only offence provided under Section 31 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein. However, due to ground realities submitted 2 2025 Live Law (SC) 240
::6::
by the counsel for the petitioners, presence of the petitioners herein (A2 to A5) before the Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Prohibition & Excise, Kurnool in DVC No.56 of 2025 is hereby dispensed with, except on those dates when the learned trial Court feels that their presence is necessary. In the event of failure of the petitioners to appear when the trial Court specifically directs, this Order shall stands automatically revoked, without recourse to this Court.
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.
10. Needless to state that the petitioners are at liberty to raise all the grounds before the trial Court.
Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.
____________________________________
JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
Date: 23.09.2026 NOTE: Issue CC by 25.09.2026 B/o KRK
::7::
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM 93
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8467 of 2026 23.09.2026
NOTE: Issue CC by 25.09.2026 B/o KRK