IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.4659 of 2010 DATE:04.06.2010 Between: Devaguptapu Pradeep Chandra Rahul and another. …… Petitioners/Accused. And: State of A.P., rep. By Public Prosecutor and another. …..Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.4659 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioners 1 and 2 who are the respondents 5 and 6 in D.V.C. No.2/2010 on the file of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Rajahmundry. The 2nd respondent is wife of the 1st respondent in D.V.C. The petitioners 1 and 2 are cousin and his wife, of husband of the 2nd respondent/defacto-complainant. It is contended that no allegations were made by the 2nd respondent in her complaint to the Protection Officer and that therefore, the case cannot be proceeded with against them. After defacto- complainant gave complaint to the Protection Officer, the Protection Officer filed the petition before the lower Court. In that petition, specific prayers were made under Sections 18, 19, 20, 22 etc., of the Protection of Women from the Domestic Violence Act 2005. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioners were unnecessarily impleaded in the petition filed in the lower Court. Though there is domestic relationship between the petitioners and the 2nd respondent, they may not have shared household, because the petitioners are living separately from husband of the 2nd respondent and other family members. These are all matters which the Magistrate after enquiry has to decide. I do not find any valid or legal reasons to quash the case in so far as petitioners are concerned, at its threshold. 2) It is stated that the 1st petitioner is a student of Chartered Accountancy (C.A) and the 2nd petitioner recently joined in local bar as Advocate. 3) In the result, the petition is dismissed. But presence of the petitioners 1 and 2 who are the respondents 5 and 6 in D.V.C. No.2/2010 in the lower Court is dispensed with during enquiry of the petition by the lower Court, except on the date of delivery of judgment, in case they are represented by Advocate. _______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J June 4, 2010 KSH