[ad_1]
Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Challa Narayana vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 4 July, 2025
APHC010641342023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3457]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 261/2024
Between:
1. CHALLA NARAYANA, S/O. C.RAMANAIAH, HINDU, AGED
ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC EMPLOYEE, R/O. PALLAPALLI,
VADDIPALEM VILLAGE, BUCHIREDDYPALEM MANDAL,
SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
2. CHALLA MANJULAMMA,, W/O. C.RAMANAIAH, HINDU, AGED
ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O. PALLAPALLI,
VADDIPALEM VILLAGE, BUCHIREDDYPALEM MANDAL,
SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
3. CHALLA RAMANAIAH,, S/O. C.CHENGAIA, HINDU, AGED
ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. PALLAPALLI,
VADDIPALEM VILLAGE, BUCHIREDDYPALEM MANDAL,
SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH
4. VEMALA LEELAMMA,, W/O. VENKAIAH, HINDU, AGED ABOUT
40 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O. PALLAPALLI,
VADDIPALEM VILLAGE, BUCHIREDDYPALEM MANDAL,
SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, S.H.O
BUCHIREDDYPALEM P.S, REP., BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATHI.
2. CHALLA VAISHNAVI, W/O. C. NARAYANA, HINDU, AGED
ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC R/O. R/O. PALLAPALLI, VADDIPALEM
VILLAGE, BUCHIREDDYPALEM MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE
DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. NOW RESIDING AT
//2//
CRLP.No.261 of 2024
CHENNAREDDYPALLI VILLAGE, PODALAKUR MANDAL.
SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):
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 Courtmay be pleased to call for
the records of pertains in CC.No.472 of 2022 on the file of learned
Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Kovur, SPSR Nellore
District and Quash the Criminal Proceedings
IA NO: 1 OF 2024
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 pleased to dispense
with filing of the original certified copy of CC.No.472 of 2022 on the file
of learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Kovur, SPSR
Nellor District before this Honble Court and pass
IA NO: 2 OF 2024
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 Pleased to grant stay
of all further proceedings in CC.No.472 of 2022 on the file of learned
Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Kovur, SPSR Nellor
District, till the disposal of main Criminal Petition and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):
1. CHAMARTHY LEELA SRINNIVASA VARMA
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
The Court made the following:
//3//
CRLP.No.261 of 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH. N
CRIMINAL PETITION No.261 of 2024
ORDER :
1. The petitioners are seeking quash of CC.No.472 of 2022 on the
file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kovur, SPSR
Nellore District. The petitioners are facing trial for offences under
Section 498-A of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of DP Act.
2. The 1st petitioner is the husband of defacto-complainant. The
petitioners 2 and 3 are the parent-in-laws and the 4 th petitioner is
the sister of 2nd petitioner. It is alleged in the complaint that the
marriage of the defacto-complainant with the 1st petitioner was
performed on 16.10.2016. It is alleged that an amount of
Rs.5,00,000/- was paid as dowry along with gold ornaments
apart from an amount of Rs.2,30,000/- towards marriage
expenses. The 1st petitioner, his parents and the sister of the 2nd
petitioner have allegedly demanded additional dowry and
harassed the 2nd respondent mentally and physically. It is also
alleged in the complaint that the parents of the 2nd respondent in
order to buy peace have transferred half acre of land by
registering it in the name of the 1st petitioner. It is also alleged
that the petitioners again after some time the harassment of the
petitioners. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent along with her
//4//
CRLP.No.261 of 2024
parents and elders of the village tried to negotiate with the
petitioners for resolving the dispute. However, the same could
not materialized. It is stated that the 2nd respondent along with
her minor son were necked out of the house during the Covid
pandemic during June, 2020. As such, the complaint was filed on
05.05.2022.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that admittedly
even as per the complaint and statement of LW.1 she was living
at her parents’ house from June, 2020. It is further submitted that
complaint was lodged only on 05.05.2022 after lapse of more
than two years from the date of the alleged harassment. It is
submitted that there is no explanation for the undue delay in
filing the complaint.
4. It is also submitted that the 4th petitioner is completely
unconnected with the marital dispute of the 1st petitioner and the
2nd respondent. However, she has been roped in without there
being any basis. It is also submitted that the 4th petitioner is living
separately with her family after her marriage. Except for visiting
her sister, now and then the 4th petitioner never indulged in
negotiations or any settlement talks. However, a sweeping
allegation is made against the 4th petitioner without there being
any basis.
//5//
CRLP.No.261 of 2024
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Assistant Public Prosecutor for the state. Though the notice is
served on the 2nd respondent, none appeared for the 2 nd
respondent.
6. The police have recorded statements of as many as eight
witnesses of which LW.4 to LW.8 are the village elders who
mediated on behalf of the 2nd respondent for reconciliation of
marital disputes.
7. The prayer of the petitioner seeking quash of CC.No.472 of 2022
cannot be considered by this Court as there are statements
which are recorded by the police during investigation which
would have to withstand the scrutiny of cross examination when
the matter is taken up for trial. The only ground of delay in filing
FIR cannot be considered as sufficient for quashing a crime or
case registered for the offences under Section 498-A of IPC. In
matrimonial cases approaching the police station would be last
resort for the victim or efforts to try and adjust, all efforts to try
and pacify themselves and all efforts to reconcile with the
intervention of elders from both sides would be resorted to first
by any victim and family.
//6//
CRLP.No.261 of 2024
8. At times, complaints are not filed immediately or soon after for
matrimonial offences in view of the social stigma and also the
possibility of irretrievable breakdown of the marriage relationship.
9. On these grounds, this Court is not inclined to quash CC.No.472
of 2022 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Kovur, SPSR Nellore District. It is left open for the petitioners to
approach the trial Court and raise all grounds as raised in the
present petition when the matter is taken up for trial.
10.With these observation, the criminal petition is dismissed.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stands closed.
___________________
JUSTICE HARINATH.N
Dated 04.07.2025
KGM
//7//
CRLP.No.261 of 2024
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH. N
CRIMINAL PETITION No.261 of 2024
Dated 04.07.2025
KGM
[ad_2]
Source link