In the judgment of Sfafe of Haryana and others v. CH.Bhajan Lal and othersl the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as follows

1 The State of Telangana, ReP' State of Telangana, HYderabad Smt. Sadia Nazneen, Wo. Syed lmran Ahmed' D/o Sved Hamed Ali' Aged' u'rtro zo-a ag' Doodh Bowli' opp Husaint 26 vears. occ. Housewtt", ii"rir"F;1i""-5i;tion. e".io" Sohil Decors, Hvderabad -dio] 2 ...ResPondents PetitionunderSection4B2ofCr'P.Cprayingthatinthecircumstances statedintheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition,theHighCourtmay be pleased to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused No'2 to 5 in CC.No.2935 12021 pending on the file of the Court of the XV Addl Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad' t.A. NO: 10F 2023 - Petition under Section 4R) ^t .. D .. _ stated n the Memorand,T"; :ff:: ::"*:;T.:n: :ifi ;ffi ::,:; be pleased to stay all further proceedings, including the appearance of the Petitioners/Accused No 2 to 5 in cc.No .2g35t2021 pending on the fire of the court of the XV Addi chief Metroporitan Magistrate, Hyderabad pending disposar of the Criminal petition. This Petition comino on far haa.i^^ . ._ ^ _ ,;;,Ti,.:. Grounds or criminar ':"ilJ;' :: sri Mohd Muzaferu'ah Khan, Advocate for the petitioner and Mrs. s.Madhavi, Asst pubric prosecutor on beharf of the Respondent No..1 and of sri Mohd. Habeebuddin, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. :""1'"r;r#";#ilr ,T: The Court made the fo owing: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL P ETITION No.10539 of 2023 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr P C' by the petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 5 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.2935 of 2021 on the file of the learned XV Additional Chief Metropolitan tr/agistrate, Hyderabad (for short 'trial Court')' arising outofCrimeNo.23Tof2o2oofW-P's.southZone,registeredforthe offences under Sections 498-4, 406 and 506 of the lndian Penal Code (for short'lPC'), Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act' 1961 and Section 4 of the t\4uslim women (Protection of Rights on fi/larriage) Act, 2019 (for short 'the Act').

2. Heard Mr. tt/lohd. Muzaferullah Khan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mrs. S tVladhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State Perused the record'

3. The petitioners-accused Nos 2 and 3 are the brothers' petitioner- accused No.4 is the unmarried sister and petitioner-accused No 5 is the married sister of accused No.1.

4. The gist of the complaint is that the 2nd respondent-de facfo complainant was married to accused No.1 on 19 12'2018 as per the customs prevailing in the tt/luslim Commuhity. At the time of marriage, I 2 certain amount of dowry was given. After marriage, they lived happily for few days Thereafter, a, the accused harassed the de factocomprainant physically and mentally demanding additional dowry. After conceiving of de facto complainant, her parents started bearing all the expenses. During her seventh month pregnancy, accused No.1 dropped her at her parental house. On 01 .10.2019, the de facto complainant was blessed with a baby boy on the instigation of petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 5, accused No.1 neither paid the hospital expenses nor visited the hospital to see her and baby boy. On 16.09.2020, the de factocomplainant went to her mat.imonial house on knowing the death news of her morher-in_ law. When she went near the dead body, accused No.1 abused her in filthy ranguage and pronounced tripre taraq in the presence of reratives and community erders Thereafter, on the instigation of petitioners- accused Nos.2 to 5, accused No..l had sent Divorce Certificate from the Qazi

5. lt is contended by the learned counsel for petitioners that the petitioners are innocent and they have been farsery impricated in the case by the de facto complainant, only to wreck vengeance in view of the matrimonial disputes between the de facto complainant and accused No.1. lt is also conlended that except bald allegations, no specific overt acts are attributed to the petitioners and the ingredients of offences 3 alleged against them are not made out Thus, he PraYed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners'

6. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor contended that all the accused, including the petitioners herein' have harassed the de facto complainant after her marriage with accused No 1 and being unable to bear the same' the present complaint has been lodged. lt is further contended that all the allegations levelled in the complaint as well as in the charge sheet are subject matter of trial' and hence, this is not a fit case to quash the proceedings at this stage' Accordingly, she prayed to dismiss the petition'

7. For the sake of convenience' Section 498-4 of IPC is extracted hereunder: 498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to crueltv'- Whoever, being the husband or the relatiive of the husband of a woman, subiects such woman to cruetty shall be punished with ip,rison*"it for a term which may extend to three years and s;hjnll also be liable to fine. Explanation - For the purpose of this section, "cruelty" means-(p)any wilful conduct which is of such a n"ture as is ti*ely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave iniury or danger to life' timb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or(h)harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any propedy or valuable security or is on account of failure by he( or any person related to her to meet sttch demand 4

8. In the judgment of Sfafe of Haryana and others v. CH.Bhajan Lal and othersl , the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as follows: accused; .to ,""iri ti"'"iii"j Thc followng cateqories,o/ cases can be stated by way ot tttustraton wherein the extraordinary po*urLnli)"i,tiJrc zza o, the nherent powers under Section 4g2 Crp.C. can be .by the High Couft either to Uuu*t'riu"e of the e-x,erctsed process of any Court or otherwise ,,!:::!.,,,^?_"r ,:!be..po2s:bte t" 6y Jii, lustice, ",ii',.",J" ","",,, u.e t.tpd and sufficien y channeltsed and infterioie g;ijet,nes o, foryulae ancl to give an e\haustive tist of myrtad kinds of """ " 10^t! cases whetein such power shoutd be ur"rl"l"Jo,"'r (1) Where the alteoatioa 'nLp"ii,ti.""iii,il1ii,i'i,!"'1",0::r'::il:::lr:;g:i:ZZ vatue.and accepted in their "rriiiriii"Ziiri.", r""i" constitute any offence or make "it i- "iri Zi"ii", tn" (2) Where the a egations in the First lnformation Repoft and o-ther materiars, if any, accompanying the F.t.R. do not discrose a cognizabte offence. iustiyinlj "n iu."tig"iir'"ii' pot,"" of[rcers utrcler Section i s6(i) o, n" coaZ","tr'cf,pt Znde, order of a t agistrate within the p,,*i"*Lriuiii-r"itrlri "n "r,n" (3) Where the unconlrovefted a egations made in the FIR or comp.talnt and the evidence cottect6d in "iirin""i iil'""u." o. not drs<lose the commission or ury on i[J')io'',riui?,ou, u case against lhe accused (l) Whgrg the a egations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizabte offence but constitt e ori- a ;o;:;;;';;zable 1!f!"?, ,". investigation is perm ted by a potice officer without of a Magistrate as contemptaied inaer seciin' iss1zl .orde^r of the Code. (5) Where the a egatrcns macle in the FtR or complant are so lbsryd .and rnlrcren y improbable on the basls'o,i'inf,n ,o pruoent oetson can ever reach a iust cottclusion lhat there B suffrcrcnt ground for proceeding against the accusei. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provtsions of the Code or the concerned Act (under *ni"n , criminal proceeding is institute(t) to tne 'isiiution ' anO conlinuance of the proceedings ancl/or where lhere is a s;pecfirc provtston tn the Code or the concerned Act. providing efficacious redress for the grievance of tne aggrieved rttii; ' roo: sc ct icri.y +:o 5 l7l where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with '"irii'iii"- iiii, ihere the- proceeding is maticioustv instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance 'ii'iiiii"u".a and with e view to spite him due to pdvate and personal grudge. ln the judgme nt of Dara Lakshmi Narayana and others v' Stafe 9. of Telangana and anothef, the Hon'ble Supreme Court' at paragraph No 32 held that: '32. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the impugned FIR No.82 of 2022 filed by respondent No'2 was initrated with ulterior motives to settle personal scores and grudges ag-ai!1s! appettant No.1 and his famity members ie ' appellant Nos.2 to 6 hie,rein. Hence, the present case at hand fatls within category (7) of illustrative parameters highlighted in Bhaian Lal Therefore' the High Court, in the present iase' erred in not exercisinq the 'piiweis avaitable to ii under Section 482 CIPC and thereby 'failed to prevent abuse of the Couft's process by continuing the criminal prosecution against the appellants'" ,l o" ln numerous cases, the Hon,ble Supreme Court, while dealing with similar cases held that making vague and generalised allegations during matrimonial conflicts, if not scrutinized, will lead to the misuse of legal processes and an encouragement for use of arm twisting tactics by a wife and/or her family. Sometimes' recourse is taken to invoke Section 4gB.AofthelPCagainstthehusbandandhisfamilyinordertoseek compliance with the unreasonable demands of a wife Therefore' the courts are bound to ensure whether there is any prima facie case againstthehusbandandhisfamilymembersbeforeprosecutingthe husband and his familY members. ' to24 rNSC 9il 6 11' In the present case' admittedry, there is no dispute with regard to the marriage between the de facio complainant and accused No.1 A perusar of the record wourd indicate that no substantiar and specific allegations have been made against the petitioners herein, except stating that they have instigated accused No.1 in harassing the de facto complainant. On a careful perusal of contents of the entire charge sheet, it is evident that there are no descriptive particulars as to in what manner the petitioners herein have subjected the de facto complainant to harassment or cruelty or demand of dowry. lt is also not the case of the de facto comprainant that any dowry articre was handed over to the petitioners herein The whore genesis of a,egations revered in the FrR and charge sheet revorves around the husband and his conduct. I\4erery mentioning that the harassment of the husband was at the instance and instigation of his famiry members, who are the petitioners_accused Nos.2 to 5' is not enough Furthermore, there are no specific a,egations against the petitioners herein as to in what manner they have threatened the de facto complainant causing criminal intimidation and as to how they have committed criminar breach of trust. section 4 of the Act dears with punishment for pronouncing talaq, which is not attracted against the , petitioners herein.

12. For the foregoing reasons and in view of the judgments referred to above, the petitiore{s cannot be dragged into criminal prosecution and the same would be sheer abuse of process of the law. Hence, the proceedings against them are liable to be quashed.

13. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed, quashing the proceedings against the petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 5 in C.C.No 2935 of 2021 on the file of the learned XV Additional Chief Metropolitan l\4agistrate, Hyderabad. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// - A.SREENIVASA REDDY SSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, '1 . The XV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad' 2.TheStationHouseOfficer,CharminarWomenPoliceStation,Hyderabad' 3. One CC to Sri. Mohd Muzaferullah Khan, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri. Sri Mohd. Habeebuddin, Advocate [OPUC] 5.TwoCCstoPublicProsecutor'HighCourtforthestateofTelangana-[oUT] 6 Two CD Copies Y.IfuCII HIGH COURT DATED:23 t06t2025 ORDER CRLP.No.10539 of 2023 { (j^ ) o o 1 * 2 5 AUG 2025 i-C ALLOWING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION. c""tu st,"