Telangana High Court
Smt. Savithri Sale vs State Of Telangana on 6 January, 2021
Bench: T.Vinod Kumar
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.6604 of 2020
ORDER:
This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
seeking to quash the proceedings by which cognizance is taken by
the trial Court of the charge sheet filed and assigning C.C. No.7881
of 2020 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
City Criminal Court, Nampally, Hyderabad, for the offences under
Sections 498-A, 406, 506 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of Dowry
Prohibition Act wherein the petitioners herein is arrayed as A-2
and A-3.
2. The criminal petition is taken up for hearing today, i.e.
06.01.2021, through Video Conferencing.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1 - State.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that,
though the present criminal petition is filed seeking to quash the
C.C. as taken cognizance by the trial Court, however, is restricting
his submissions to the extent of the manner and method in which
the trial Court had taken cognizance of the charge sheet filed by
the respondent which is contrary to the procedure prescribed
under the Cr.P.C. Learned Counsel for the petitioners would
submit that the concerned Magistrate is required to record reasons
for taking cognizance of the charge sheet filed in the crime No.112
of 2020. Learned Counsel for the petitioners by drawing attention
of this Court to the judgment of the combined High Court for the
State of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh dated 04.04.2017 in
Criminal Petition No.2458 of 2017, wherein similar such
cognizance taken by the trial Court by affixing rubber stamp and
writing the provisions of law by the Magistrate was deprecated and
such cognizance order was set aside and the matter remitted back
to the Special Magistrate's Court for passing order taking
cognizance of the offences by considering the charge sheet and
annexure thereto and pass appropriate orders in accordance with
law. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that even in
the facts of the present case, as seen from the order taking
cognizance as passed by the learned trial Court, the same
procedure has been adopted and therefore he seeks for quashing of
the cognizance order.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that if
this Court is inclined to quash the order passed by the learned
Magistrate of taking cognizance of the charge sheet filed, the
matter be remitted back to the trial court by directing the
magistrate to consider the charge sheet along with the annexure
filed and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
6. Having regard to the submissions made and a perusal of the
docket proceeding by which the charge sheet as filed in Crime No.
112 of 2020 is taken cognizance and CC No. 7881 of 2020 is
assigned, is bereft of reasons, which the court is required to record
as indicated in the judgement of this court on which reliance has
been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. In view of
the above, this court is of the view that the order of the trial Court
taking cognizance of charged sheet filed in Crime No. 112 of 2020
is not accordance with the provisions of Cr.P.C. and is liable to be
set aside.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the docket
order taking cognizance of the charge sheet filed in Crime No. 112
of 2020 and the consequential assignment of CC No. 7881 of 2020
is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the XIII Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, City Criminal Court, Nampally,
Hyderabad to consider the charge sheet and annexure filed and to
pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
8. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in
the light of this final order.
___________________________
JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR
Date: 06.01.2021
MRKR
