CRLP/17920/2025 of Srividya Musku Vs The State of Telangana on 31 December 2025

ORDER:

1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 5,2 | of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking o quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.1 in rl C.No.3067 of 2024, on the file of the learned I Additional Junior Civ I Judge -_cum_l Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ranga Re Jdy District at L.B.Nagar, registered for the offences punishable rr der Sections 1 18(1 ), 329(4) and 352 read with 3(5) of BNS, 2023.

2. Heard Sri C.Anurag, learned counsel for the pet tioner as well as Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, the learned Adc tional public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1- State I

3. Learned petitioner's counsel has submitted that the petitioner is the wife of the de facfo complainant and that there are certain misunderstandings between the petitioner and the de facto complainant, but no such alleged incident has occurred as mentioned in the complaint and that the petitioner is not at all involved in the said set of allegations. He further submitted that even as per the contents of the complaint, it is the mother of the petitioner who is alleged to have beaten the mother of the de facfo complainant and thus, no offence can be attributed to the petitioner herein. He therefore prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submifted that the proseeution could eolleet the injury eertifieete 6f the mOthef of the de facto complainant and also could examine and record the statements of witnesses which proved that the alleged offences occurred and that the petitioner went along with her mother and brother on the said date of offence to the house of the de facto complainant whereupon the alleged incident has occurred. He therefore prayed to dismiss the petition.

5. Perused the record. The contents of the complaint and the recitals of charge sheet point out the alleged offences against the accused- The petitioner herein is one of the accused and the I \ \ \

offences include Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023. Admi I disputes between the petitioner and the de facto cor charge sheet would further reveal that the Doctor, rv the mother of the de faefo complainant, is listed , strength of the medical evidence and the veracity c,l need to be tested during the course of trial. The truttr the said allegations can be culled out only after a 1r Considering the submissions made by both parties a and circumstances of the case, it is deemed appropr of the Criminal Petition by dispensing with lhe apg,r petitioner before the Trial Court.

6. Hence, the Criminal Petition is disposed of distrrr presence of the petitioner/accused No.1 before I t provided that the petitioner is represented through rrr every date of hearing and that she shall be present i Court whenever her presence is specifically requ r course of trial. ld ly, there are plainant. The ro has treated s LWB. The the witnesses rr otherwise in ll-fledged trial. rd in the facts ate to dispose arance of the nsing with the e Trial Court Advocate on -.fore the Trial d during the

7. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall sta rd closed. Sd/- B.(.VYJAYANTHI ASSIIJ -ANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// I ECTION OFFICER I\o '1 . The I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-l Additional Juci ial Magistrate of First Class at L B Nagar, Ranga Reddy District.

2. The SHO Nagole Police Station, Rachakonda.

3. One CC to SRl. COTIPALLY ANUAGAdvocate [OPUC]

4. One CC to SRl. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Advocate [OPU( ]

5. Two CD Capies To I

;T HIGH COURT DATED:31 l,1212025 CRLP.No.17920 ot 2025 CRIMINAL PEITITION IS DISPOSED OF. sh 03 FEB lm i SmTC C) (J .f * I t A,b I