AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This Criminal Petition is filed, aggrieved by the order passed by the III Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Traffic Mobile Court), Hyderabad, in Crl.M.P.No.164 of 2025 in D.V.C.No.146 of 2025, dated 01.04.2025, whereby the learned trial Court passed an ex parte order in favour of respondent No.1.
Heard Mr.Prateek Kiran, learned counsel representing M/s. Anuradha Cherukuri, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.N.Srinivas Choudary, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.2.
With their consent, the criminal petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and respondent No.1 are husband and wife. Respondent No.1 filed D.V.C.No.146 of 2025 under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short, "the Act") before the III Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Integrated Family Courts Complex, Hyderabad, claiming various reliefs. In the said D.V.C., respondent No.1 filed an application vide Crl.M.P.No.164 of 2025 under Section 23(2) of the Act read with Section 18 of the Act, seeking an interim ex parte protection order in her favour and in favour of her minor son. The learned trial Court, without hearing the petitioner or providing him an opportunity of hearing, granted an ex parte order on 01.04.2025. Thereafter, the petitioner filed his counter in the main D.V.C.No.146 of 2025 and also filed an application vide Crl.M.P.No.11 of 2026 under Section 25 of the Act on 05.01.2026, seeking vacation of the ex parte interim order dated 01.04.2025. Since then, the learned trial Court has been adjourning the application for one reason or the other, particularly on account of the regular Presiding Officer being unavailable and the matter having been assigned to the in-charge Court. The in-charge Court has also been adjourning the application from time to time for one reason or the other, despite the urgency expressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner before the trial Court. He further submitted that the petitioner was set ex parte in D.V.C.No.146 of 2025 as well as in Crl.M.P.No.164 of 2025. The petitioner filed an application vide Crl.M.P.No.44 of 2026 seeking to set aside the ex parte order, and the said application is pending. Unless this Court issues necessary directions to the learned trial Court for disposal of the said applications, the petitioner will be put to great hardship.
Per contra, the learned counsel for respondent No.1 submitted that, after receiving summons in D.V.C.No.146 of 2025, two counsels appeared on behalf of the petitioner and reported that they had instructions and were going to file vakalat. However, no counsel entered appearance thereafter, resulting in an ex parte order being passed against the petitioner. The petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.11 of 2026, and the said application is also defective. However, he submits that the application filed by the petitioner vide Crl.M.P.No.44 of 2026, seeking to set aside the ex parte order, is posted to 13.08.2026. Unless the said ex parte order is set aside, the petitioner is not entitled to seek disposal of Crl.M.P.No.11 of 2026.
Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that though the petitioner filed the present Criminal Petition seeking to set aside/read down Clause 3 of the order dated 01.04.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.164 of 2025 in D.V.C.No.146 of 2025, however, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present Criminal Petition for grant of the relief sought in Crl.M.P.No.44 of 2026 on the ground that the petitioner had already approached the trial Court and filed Crl.M.P.No.11 of 2026 seeking vacation of the ex parte order dated 01.04.2025 by invoking the provisions of Section 25 of the Act on 01.05.2026. Even according to the parties, the said application is pending before the trial Court.
During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner was set ex parte in D.V.C.No.146 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.164 of 2025. The petitioner had already filed Crl.M.P.No.44 of 2026 seeking to set aside the ex parte order dated 01.04.2025 and grant permission to the petitioner to prosecute the proceedings. Even according to the parties, the said application was posted to 13.08.2026.
Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any view on the merits of the application or any other proceedings which are pending before the trial Court, the trial Court is directed to conclude the proceedings in Crl.M.P.No.44 of 2026 as expeditiously as possible, preferably on or before 27.08.2026. The learned trial Court is also directed to consider the application filed by the petitioner vide Crl.M.P.No.11 of 2026 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.
Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.