Rapelli Avinash Sohan, vs The State of Telangana, Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR — CRLP/5152/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS on 08th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HBHC010189662026

Filing Number

CRLP/5270/2026

Filing Date

25-Mar-2026

Registration No

CRLP/5152/2026

Registration Date

07-Apr-2026

Judge

J Sreenivas Rao

Coram

J Sreenivas Rao

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRLP ( 41 )

Sub-Category

DVC-2005 Conviction - Domestic Violence Act ( 138 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL Section

Decision Date

08-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS

Last updated 19-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Rapelli Avinash Sohan,

    Adv. BOOSA SHIVACHANDRA

  2. 2.Rapelli Aruna,

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Telangana, Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

  2. 2.Thadigoppula @ Rapelli Swathi,

  3. 3.Rapelli Pradyumni,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Apr-2026

    J Sreenivas RaoView PDF

    The Telangana High Court dismissed the criminal petition seeking to quash domestic violence proceedings against the petitioners, finding that specific allegations required adjudication at trial rather than at the petition stage. However, the court dispensed with the petitioners' physical presence in the trial court proceedings, allowing them to be represented through counsel on all hearing dates, with the condition that they must appear personally if specifically required by the trial court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-Apr-2026

    For Admission

    J Sreenivas Rao

  4. 25-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRLP/5152/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Telangana High Court dismissed the criminal petition seeking to quash domestic violence proceedings against the petitioners, finding that specific allegations required adjudication at trial rather than at the petition stage. However, the court dispensed with the petitioners' physical presence in the trial court proceedings, allowing them to be represented through counsel on all hearing dates, with the condition that they must appear personally if specifically required by the trial court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case