Vijay Kumar Gurramkonda v. The State of Telangana

Court: High Court for State of Telangana

Bench: TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

Judgment date: 2026-02-10

Case summary

High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-02-10. Vijay Kumar Gurramkonda v. The State of Telangana. Read the judgment and case details on...

Judgment text

t34441 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL NO: 12314 OF 2023 Between: Vijay Kumar Gurramkonda, S/o. V. Ramanaiah Gurramkol{a,lge. 46_Years, O6c. tf Job, Caste. Balija R/o. H. No. 7-1-543, Laasya-1O7, Poojitha Estate, Sunder Nagar, SR Nagar (PO),Hyderabad - 18, Telangana State. ... PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Telangana, WPS, CCS, DD, Hyderabad, Represented by Public Prosecutor High Court, Hyderabad. ... RESPONDENT'COMPLAI NANT 2 Sandeep Pattern, S/o. Rajeshwara Rao Pattem, Age, 43 _Years, Occ. Business, R/o. 6-1-133/A, Swatantara Colony, Padma Rao Nagar, Secunderabad. .. RESPONDENT'DEFACTO COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 482 of Cr. P.

C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against petitioner/accused, proceedings initiated under CC 8604 of 2023 pending on the file of Xlll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court, Manoranjan Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad. l. A. NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr. P. C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court. may be pleased to permit the Petitioner to leave for USA in the third week of December,2023 and return back in the second week of January,2024, pending disposal of the main criminal petitioner. l ! l ! I I I I l l. A. NO: 2 OF 2,023 petition under Section 482 of Cr. P.

C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to r;tay all further proceedings inclusive of appearance of petitioners /accused in CC 8604 of 2023 pending on the file of Xlll Additional Chief Metropolitan lVtagistrate, Mahila Court, Manoranjan Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad, perrding disposal of the main criminal petition. l. A. NO: 1 OF 2025 petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the lVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pteased to extend the interim order dated 12102t2025 in Crl P No 12314 of ZOZ3 passed by this Court until further orders in the interest of Justice. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K. Ravinder Reddy, . fldye6:ate for the Petitioner, Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent Nr>. 1 and of Sri P.

Nagesh, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. The Court mac{e the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 1 2314 0F 2023 DATE: 10-02-2026 Between Vijay Kumar Gurramkonda Petitioner And The State of Telangana, WPS, CCS, DD, Hyderabad, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad and another ... Respondents ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C. C. No. 8604 of 2023 on the file of learned Xlll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court, Manoranjan Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad, registered for the offences under Sections 498A, 406 and 506 l. P. C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. Heard Sri K. Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel for the peti[ioner and Sri P. Nagesh, learned counsel for respondent No. 2. I Crl. P. No. l23 l4 of2023 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the dispules in the present case arose at u. s. A. and that the petitioner and the sister of the de facto complainant are husband and urife, lived at u. s. A. and there is no averment as to dowry haras,sment, even according to the contents of the complaint. He further submitted that the complaint does not disclose any specific averments against the petitioner herein and that bald allegations are levelled against the petitioner. He further submitted that the de facto comprainant being the brother-in-raw of the petitioner lodged a farse compraint and that no instances of haras:sment are reported in the complaint. That, continuation of proceedings against the petitioner would be an abuse of process . of law. He further submitted that when the offences are alleged to harre been committed at U. s. A. , sanction under section 1gB cr. P. c. is mandatory and hence, the comptaint is not maintainable.

He, therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings in the present c. c. against the petitioner. He reried upon the judgment of the Honourable Apex court in Achin Gupta v. state of Haryana and anotherl. I 2024 Lawsuit (SC) 392 J ETD,J Crl. P. No. l23l4 of 2023 4. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has submitted that the ingredients of the complaint attract the offences alleged under sections 4984, 406 and 506 l. P. c. and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He further submitted that the petitioner was harsh upon the sister of the de facto complainant, even after begetting two sons. He further submitted that part of the offences occurred in lndia and hence, the complaint is very much maintainable.

He further submitted that during the stay of the victim in lndia, certain amounts were transferred from the joint account of the victim and the petitioner into the account of the petitioner and with the said funds, the petitioner has purchased properties in the name of his father, causing loss to the victim. He further submitted that after filing the present compraint, the petitioner has resorted to file a criminal case against the de facto complainant and that he has put the sister of the de facto complainant to untold harassment. He, therefore, prayed to dismiss the Criminal Petition. 5. Perused the record. 6. lt is alleged that the petitioner herein has bullied, threatened and manipulated the sister of the de facto complainant with an intention of controlling her and benefiting from her 4 E-I'D. J Crl. P. nNo. I 23 I 4 ol 2023 servi(:es, both professionally and financially.

lt is specifically alleged that in August, 2022, when the petitioner and his wife (sister of the de facto complainant) moved to lndia, the petitioner and his family members treated the sister of the de facto complainant as a servant and has transferred the amounts existirrg in the joint account into the own account of the petitioner. It is frrrther alleged that unable to bear the said harassment, the victirn moved to U. s. with the two chitdren and in retaliation, the petitioner has filed a farse complaint of extortion against the de facto complainant, his father and his wife and is demanding that the victim should return to lndia unconditionally. lt is further averred in the complaint that the petitioner also filed a divorce petition at Kukatpally court and is actively trying to sell off their joint llroperties. The compraint, dated 09. 11 . 2022, filed by the sister of the de facto comptainant is also enclosed to the present complaint. ln the said complaint, the victim i. e.

, wife of the petitioner herein, described a particular incident that occurred on 08. 11 -2022. she has stated that the petitioner had a continuous discurision throughout the night with her and when she asked for her own money from the house sare proceeds in u. s. A. , the petitic'ner was upset and was packing his suitcase with all financial documents and entered into an altercation with her in r. ,,i'*#H Crl. P. No. 12314 of front of the house riraid. lt is further stated that on seeing said incident, their son got scared and deveroped fever. lt further stated that the keys of the joint rocker are in possession of the petitioner's father and that the victim developed concern about the security of herself and her children. Thus, the allegations do point out a prima facie case against petitioner herein for the offences under Sections 4gBA, 406 506 l. P. c. and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry prohibition Act. 7. The earlier incidents that occurred at u. s. A.

and occurrence of series of incidents in lndia point out the strained relations between the petitioner and the sister of the de facto complainant. Admittedly, there are cases of divorce and a c. c. fildd by the petitioner herein against the de facto complainant and his sister. since some of the incidents of harassment are afleged to have occurred while the sister of de facto complainant was staying in lndia, prior sanction under section 188 cr. p. c. is necessary. The veracity and the strength of the witnesses need to be tested during the course of triar to know the truth othenruise in the allegations levelted in the complaint. The bank statements are also filed to show the transfer of amounts from joint account to the account of the petitioner. I i Crl. P. No. l2ll4 ot2023 8. ln Achin Gupta's case (surpa), it was held that '2O. lt is now well settled that the power under Section 482 of the Cr. P. C.

has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution, only where such exercise is justified by the tests laid down in the Section itself. lt is also well settled that Section 482 of the Cr. P. C. does not confer any new power on the High Court but only saves the inherent power, which the Court possessed before the enactment of the Criminal Procedure Code. There are three circumstances under which the inherent jurisdiction may be exercised, namely (i) to give effect to an order under the Code, (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of Court, and (iii) to othenruise secure the ends of justice. 35. ln one of the recent pronouncements of this Court in Mahmood Ali & Ors. v. State of U. P. & Ors. , 2023 Online SC 950, authored by one of us (J. B. Pardiwala, J. ), the legal principle applicable apropos Section 482 of the CrPC was examined.

Therein, it was observed that when an accused comes before the High Court, invoking either the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC or the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, to get the FIR or the criminal proceedings quashed, essentially on the ground that such proceedings are manifestly frivolous or vexatious or instituted with the ulterior motive of wreaking vengeance, then in such circumstances, the High Court owes a duty to look into the FIR with care and a little more closely. lt was further observed that it will not be enough for the Court to look into the averments made in the FIR/complaint alone for the purpose of ascertaining whether the necessary E1'D. J Crl. P. No.

l2ll4 of 2023 ingredients to constitute the alleged offence are disclosed or not as, in frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection, to try and read between th6 lines. " 9. But, in the present case, the allegations point out the transfer of amounts from the joint account to the personal account of the petitioner and further, it is alleged that the petitioner is not taking care of his wife and children. There are also specific instances of harassment narrated in the complaint filed by the victim herself and particularly, by the de facto complainant in the present complaint. Therefore, the facts of the cited decision differ from the facts of the case on hand. Hence, the same cannot be applied to the case on hand. 10.

ln view of the above held discussion, it is opined that it is not a fit case to quash the proceedings against the petitioner at this stage. However, it is deemed appropriate to dispense with the attendance of the petitioner before the trial Court. 11. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of dispensing with the attendance of the petitioner before the trial Court provided he is represented by a counsel before the trial Court on I r Crl. P. No. 123 l4 of 2023 every date of hearing and shall appear before the trial court whenever his presence is required during the course of trial. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed SD/. P. PONNA KRISHNA TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Xlll Additionar chief Metroporitan Magistrate at Nampaly, Hyderabad 2. The station House, women police station, ccs DD, Hyderabad 3' Two CC:i to the Public Prosecutor, High '. s' Court for the ' State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 4. One CC to Sri K.

Ravinder Reddy, Advocate tOpUCI 5. One CC to Sri p. Nagesh, Advocate tOpUCI 6. Two CD Copies . VH/PSI. 8,,y I , HIGH COIJRT DATED i 1010212026 &.. t]} + o U" ORDER s CRLP. No. 12314 ol 2023 DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINA. L PETITION ,J-r. -s rc[=f z<

Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.