THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.1792 & 3232 of 2012 Date:23.04.2014 Crl.P.No.1792/2012 Between:
S. Prameela Kumari and others.
. Petitioners.
AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad.
. Respondent.
Crl.P.No.3232/2012 Between:
S. Pramod Reddy . Petitioner.
AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and another.
. Respondents.
The Court made the following :
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.1792 & 3232 of 2012 COMMON ORDER:
These two petitions are filed to quash proceedings in C.C.No.7/2001 & C.C.No.495/2011 on the file of III Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District.
2. Crl.P.No.1792/2012 is filed by A2 & A3. Crl.P.No.3232/2012 is filed by A1. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC & Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. Herd both sides.
4. Above said C.Cs are registered on the basis of complaint given by second respondent herein to Medipalli Police Station. Petitioner in Crl.P.No.3232/2012 is the husband and petitioners in Crl.P.No.1792 are the in-laws of second respondent.
5. Heard both sides who advanced arguments at length.
6. From the submissions of both sides, it is clear that the trial in C.C.No.7/2011 has already commenced and four witnesses were examined and cross-examined. On a perusal of the material on record and after considering the submissions of both sides including the rulings cited before me, I feel that it is not desirable to decide the merits and demerits of the case or the allegations and counter allegations of both parties in a quash petition at this stage since charge sheet is filed after full-fledged investigation and trial also commenced on the basis of said charge sheet. One of the grievance of the Advocate for petitioners is that when the accused have filed petition to recall P.Ws.1 & 2 for cross-examination on certain aspects in spite of allowing the said petition, the witnesses are not appearing and it is causing hardship. Advocate for petitioners also submitted that both P.Ws.1 & 2 have to appear before the Court on a single day as cross-examination of these two witnesses have to be done on the same day to avoid filling up of lacuna and that he is ready to cross-examine these two witnesses on the very same day. Considering these aspects, I feel that instead of deciding the allegations and counter allegations in these quash petitions, parties shall be directed to proceed with the trial and urge all these grounds before the Court below and cooperate with the trial Court for disposal of the case.
12. For these reasons, Criminal Petitions are disposed of by directing the prosecution to produce both P.Ws.1 & 2 on the same day to be fixed by the trial Court and on such production, advocate for A1 to A3 shall cross-examine them on the very same day. Prosecution shall produce the witnesses, within three months from the date of this order for the purpose of cross-examination and on the date of production, their examination should be completed without taking any further adjournment, by either party.
13. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these Criminal Petitions, shall stand disposed of .
JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR
Date:23.04.2014 mrb