CRLP/7720/2026 of Patnala Siva Prasad Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 2 September 2026

1. PATNALA SIVA PR RAJAKA BY NAGAR,KANCHARAP 7780428512.

2. PATNALA NOOKA RA

3. PATNALA KANAKA YEARS, RAJAKA NAGAR,KANCHARAP 7386625661.

4. PATNALA BHULAKS RAJAKA BY CASTE VISAKHAPATNAM CI

5. PATNALA SATYARA RAJAKA BY CASTE, VISAKHAPATNAM CI

6. PATNALA VARA PR RAJAKA BY NAGAR,KANCHARAP

1. THE STATE OF A PROSECUTOR,HIGH HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE 3rd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT RI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNC NAL PETITION NO: 7720/2026 RASAD, S/O.NOOKA RAJU,AGED 30 CASTE,R/O.D.NO.57-9-6/2, PALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM C AJU DIED, PATNALA NOOKA RAJU DIE MAHALAXMI, W/O.NOOKA RAJU,A BY CASTE,R/O.D.NO.57-9-6/2, PALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM C SHMI, W/O. SATYA RAO,AGED 41 ,R/O.D.NO.32-1-45/2, NATHAYYAPAL TY, AO, S/O.LATE MUTYALU,AGED 50 R/O. D.NO.32-1-45/2, NATHAYYAPALE TY, RASAD, S/O.NOOKA RAJU,AGED 32 CASTE,R/O.D.NO.57-9-6/2, PALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM CITY, ...PETITIONER/ACC AND ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS H COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD

CHEAM 0 YEARS, SUBASH CITY,CELL ED AGED 47 SUBASH CITY,CELL YEARS, EM,BHPV, 0 YEARS, EM,BHPV, 2 YEARS, SUBASH CUSED(S) S PUBLIC ESH AT

MRK,J Crl.P.No.7720 of 2026

AMRAVATI.

2. PATNALA ANUSHA, W/O. P. SIVA PRASAD,AGE 31 YEARS. CASTE RAJAKA,R/O. D. NO. 27-7-130, SRINAGAR, NEAR RAMALAYAM,GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM,

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): 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 pleased to quash the proceeding in C.C.No.3811 of 2023 on the file of I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, filed against the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 6 and 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 to dispense with filing of certified copy of C.C.No.3811of 2023, 16-10-2023 on the file of I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, and pass IA NO: 2 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 to grant stay of all further proceedings against petitioners/Accused No.1 to 6 in C.C.No.3811 of 2023 on the file of I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

1. UMA MAHESWARA RAO KODURU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

MRK,J Crl.P.No.7720 of 2026

The Court made the following Order:

Instant Criminal Petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023, has been filed on behalf of the petitioners herein (A1 to A6), seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.3811 of 2023 on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Visakhapatnam, wherein they were charged with the offences punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. K.Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.2 (A2) passed away on 14.12.2023 due to ill health and as such, he restricted his prayer to the extent of dispensing with the presence of the petitioner Nos.1 & 3 to 6 (A1 & A3 to A6) 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. 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 petitioner Nos.1 & 3 to 6 (A1 & A3 to A6), before the trial Court, he has not opposed the same.

MRK,J Crl.P.No.7720 of 2026

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 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. 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 by the counsel for the petitioners, presence of petitioner Nos.1 & 3 to 6 herein (A1 & A3 to A6) before the I Additional 12022 LiveLaw (SC) 594

MRK,J Crl.P.No.7720 of 2026

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Visakhapatnam, in C.C.No.3811 of 2023 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.

8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed as abated insofar as petitioner No.2 (A2) is concerned, and the Criminal Petition is disposed of insofar as petitioner Nos.1 & 3 to 6 (A1 & A3 to A6) are concerned.

9. Needless to state that the petitioner Nos.1 & 3 to 6 (A1 & A3 to A6) are at liberty to raise all the grounds before the trial Court.

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J

Dated: 03.09.2026 MDP