The High Court · 2025

of Telangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of ... Respondent 2. Huda Nishat, D/o. Mohd. Abdul Aleem, Aged about, 27 Years, Occ. Not Known to the Petitioners, Rlo. 16-2-5116, Akbarbagh, Malakpet, Hyderabad. ... Respondents/De-facto 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 as against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 to 6 C C No.514612023 pending on the file of the Court of the Xilt Addt. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Manoranjan Complex, Gandhi Bhavan, Hyderabad. ----.-// /,/ ,// l.A. NO: 4OF 2424 Petition rrnrler Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Merro :r rdum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, :he ligh Court may be pleased to exterri the interim order dated 14.09.2023 passed in CRL.P. No.6716 of 2O2:\,rn i further orders. l.A. NO: 3 OF 2024 Petition r r.rrler Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying thal in the circumstances stated in the Mi:nrc,';rrdum of Grounds of Criminal Petitton,the lligh Court may be pleased to erxterrri the interim order dated 14.09.202'.3 passe,d in CRLP.No. 671612023 until ftrdrrrrr orders and to pass LA. NO: 2OF 2424 Petition trnder Section 482 of Cr.P .C praying that in the circumstances stated in the lVk:rror';rrrd um of Grqunds of Criminal Petiticn, :he liigh Court may be pleased to exterrl the interim order dated 1410912423 pas.sed in CRL.P. No.6716 ol 2O2il :n: i further orders l.A. NO: 1OF 2A24 Petition r nder Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying thert in the circumstances stated in the Memc';rndum of Grounds of Criminal Petit'on,the tligh Court may be pleased tc, e:<'end the interim order dated '4109120 13 passed in Crl.P.No.6716 of 210 >-3 until further orders or for such othr..r perioc as this Honble Court deeds fit i^ thr; present circumstances of the case, i.r the int lrest of justice l.A. NO: 3 OF 2023 Petition r nde,' Section 482 of Cr.P .C praying thert in the circumstances stated in the Merr-rorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petitir:n, the tligh Court may be pleased to e:rtenc the interim order dated 1410912023 passed in CRL.P. No.6716 ol 202:t rinli 'urther orders. 7 l.A. NO: 2OF 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 extend the interim order dated 1410912023 passed in Crl.P.No.6716 of 2023 until further orders. 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 stay all further proceedings including the appearance of the petitioners / 44 to 6 in CC No. 514612023 pending on the file of Xlll Addl. Chief Metropolitan lVlagistrate, Manoranjan Complex Gandhi Bhavan, Hyderabad. This Petition coming on fo[ hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Sharad Sanghi, Advocgte for the Petitioner and Sri E.Ganesh, Asst. Public Prodecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri C.Sharan Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER - I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENU(}OPAL - CRIMINAL PETITION No.67l6 OF 2O2|;l - ORDER: The prr;scrrt Criminal Petition is filed seel:in11 to quash the proceedings; a lainst the petitioners/ accused Ncs,z to 6 in C.C.No.5lzllt cl 2023 on the file of the learnr:d.KIII Additiona-l Chief Metr:,po .itan Magistrate, Manoranj an t-)onrpLe x, Gandhi Bhaval, Hyderatrad, registered for the offences ytunishable under Sections 4i',C), t()6, 498-A, 506 r/w 34 of I.I)C. ani Sections 3 and 4 of t-ht Dowry Prohibition Act and Sr:ction Ir ald 4 of Muslim Wotnilr l)rotection of Rights and Marria,ge l.ct, 2019.

2. Heard M : ,\kshad Salghi, learned cou': sel re presenting petitioners irn d I/[r.E.Ganesh, learned Assistant ])ublit: Prosecutor appearing 1i-rr :espondent No.1-State. Mr.O.Share n Reddy, learned colrns'l representing respondent No 2. Perused the record

3. The br-i::f f€,.cts of the case are that the :.narriage between respondent l{r: ,2 and one Mohammed Rafr--eq Ar war, was performed on 2,9.O8.2O13; that at the time of m.arriagt, father of rNpondent lio,.l presented 30 tulas of gold, strrndrrd Jahez articles, KTIvI Like, 12 tulas of gold and Fts.25,O{)O/- cash I 2 towards dowry to her husband. The couple were blessed with three children during their wedlock. on 20. r2.2o2r respondent No.2, filed a complaint against her husband, petitioners herein and her in-laws, stating that her husband and his relatives subjected her to cruelt5z and harassed her for want of additional dowry, further, her husband pronounced Talaq thrice on the instigation of his family -"-b".". she further stated that she has put forth her grievance before the family elders and waited for some time for amicable ,pettlement but all efforts of her gone in vain, due to which, delay had occurred in lodging the complaint.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioner Nos. 1 is the brother_in-law, petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are sisters-in-laws of respondent No.2. Relying on the decisions passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and Others Vs. State of Bihar and Othersr, K.Subba Rao Vs. The State of Telanganaz, Kailashben Mahendrabhai Patel & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & another3 and Abhishek vs state of Madhya pradesh+ he submits that L 2022 Law Suit (SC) 149 ' (2018| t4 SCC 4s2 I Criminal Appeat No.4003 12024 ArrsingOut ofSLp (CRL) No.4O44 of201g t 2o2a tNsczzs 7,', J relatives of thc husband should not be roped in on tre basis of omnibus zrlleseitions unless specific inst.anoes of their involvemen': in ttLe crime are made out. Statin6l thrrs. re seeks to allow the Crirnir ril Petition.

5. On tl. e cther hand, learned coun sel rt presenting respondent l''o . i vehemently opposed to quash tLLe p roceedings against the p el i :' oners as police have investiga.:ed thr : case and filed charge shr. rr. against the accused. He furthr'r cont:nded that it is not ir fit. case to .,quash the proceedi..ngr; ra.lainst the petitioners at tlt Ls junc$rre and the matter is to brr de:ided after conducting trii; I by the trial Court and seeks to 11 smiss the Criminal Pet.rr,ic,r.

6. Learnr.rl rl.l;,sistant Public Prosecutor con<:edr:s t I the said request.

7. Having, reg zrrd to the submissions of rr:spr:ctir e learned counsel ald rel'rrng on the decisions cited (supra 1 to )) and the decisions passerl :y the Honble Supreme Court rn Dara Lakshmi Narayana and ()thers Vs. State of Telangana and anothers ald Geeta Mehrotrir and another Vs. State of Uttar pra desh and t ZOZrSf. On tirLc :i() 3682 4 another6, this Court is of the opinion that general allegations are leveled against the petitioner No. 1/A4 herein and no specific and distinct allegations are made out against him. In the absence of any specific role attributed to petitioner No. L /A4 herein it would be unjust if he is forced to go through the tribulations of the trial. Therefore, this Court is inclined to allow the Criminal Petition by quashing the proceedings in io far as petitioner No.l/accused No.4 is concerned in C.C.No.5l46 of 2023 on the frle of the learned XIII Additional Chief Metropolitar Magistrate, Maloranjal Complex, Gandhi Bhavan, Hyderabad.

8. Further, the objections taken by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for respondent No.2 does not call for any interference of this Court as there are specifrc allegations against petitioner No.2/accused No.5. However, petitioner No.2/accused No.5 is at libergr to file discharge petition arrd on such petition being filed, the trial Court shall dispose of the sarne on merits uninfluenced by any of the observations made by this Order.

9. A perusal of record revea_ls that petitioner No.3/accused No.6 found absconding and LOC was initiated 6 lzotzls s.c.R.64l - 5 against her a.trl police obtained permission tc fil: separate supplemen t-,:r'r :harge sheet against petitior:Lr:r .\o., 3 / accused No.6, as srrc:h this Court is not inclined to allou, tlre petition and accordirrgll, the Criminal Petition is disrnisserI in so far the petitiors,ll \o.3/accused No.6 is concernr,:d.

10. With the erbove observations, this Crirrrinal ,etition is disposed of. Miscell,: nr,rr rs Petitions, pending if arJr, st all stand closed. ISd/. L. L,\KSHMI BABU DEPUl Y REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SEC TION OFFICER To, 1 2 J 4 5 The Vll Additic:r-;rl Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Nampally, Hyderabad The Statiorr rlr: t r;e Officer, Saidabad Police Station, Flvderaba l One CC tc firi liharad Sanghi, Advocate [OPUC]. Two CCs to P.rtrlic Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telz'ngana. [OUT] Two CD Cooies YJR /I'SL ) HIGH COL'R'T DATED:0710:1t2025 ORDER CRLP.No.6716 ot 2023 ./,,-- (" tES T4i i. r.),, ,t ()

9. * \.. .? I .IUL 2L[ {{ 5) * DISPOSING OF THE CRTMINAL PETITION.