The High Court · 2025

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 in CC no. 245 of 2021 on the file of Junior Civil Judge Alampur, Mahabubnagar District. t.A. NO: oF 2021 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Membrandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in CC no. 245 of 2021 on the file of Junior Civil Judge Alampur, Mahabubnagar District pending disposal of the criminal petition. This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri N krishna sumanth, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri. M. Vivekananda Reddy, Assistant Public Prosecutor, on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and of Sri. Rupender, representing Ms. A. Rupa Devi, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER p r*' HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVI\ S RAO CRIMINAL PETITI ON No.10266 of .. 021 ORDER This Criminal Petition has been filed by the pe,i ioners/accused Nos.2 to 4, sceking to quash the proceedings in C.C I o.245 of 2021 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Alampur, jc - the offences punishable under Section 498-.4 of the Indian penat ( ode, 1860 (for short 'lPC') and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry prohi I rion Act, 1961 (for short'DP Act').

2. The casc of the prosecution in brief is that orr

13.04.2021 at 10:00 hours, the complainant lodged a complaint s ating that on

16. I 1.2016, her parents performed her marriage witl. rccused No. l, according to l{indu traditions, giving Rs.2,00,000i- n cash and 3 tulas of gold as dowry. After marriage, they lived toget Ler happily for about l5 days, after which her husband resumed his railway duty. Even when at home, he often spoke over the phone u,iJ someone and neglected her. Later, she leamed that he was in love rv th one Vadde Mahadevi and continued that relationship despite j eir marriage. When she questioned him, her husband, brother-in-lavr aunt, and co- sister abused and assaulted her, demanding t r additional Rs.5,00,000/- as dowry. They subjected her to mentr:l and physical 2 harassment. During Shivaratri festival l-i:.ZOl7, at her sister-in-law's house in Wanaparthy, her husband and relatives again assaulted her, \ pulled her hair, and drove her out of the house. Later, her brother-in- law apologized to her father and brought her back to Bethamcherla, but her husband's behaviour did not change. On 09.12.2019, she overheard her husband speaking to Mahadevi over the phone, making affectionate remarks and money transfers. When she confionted him, he quarreled with her, and or27.12.2019, he and his family members again beat her and sent her away. Her parents then took her to Pragatoor village. She stated that her husband, brother-in-law, aunt, and co-sister have continuously harassed her physically and mentally for additional dowry. Hence, the present complaint.

3. Heard Mr.N.Krishna Sumanth, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.M.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No.l and Mr.Rupender, leamed counsel representing Ms.A.Rupa Devi, learned counsel for respondent No-2

4. Leamed counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence and have been falsely implicated in the present case only because petitioner No.l is the brother, petitioner No.2 is the mother, and petitioner No.3 is the sister-in-law of accused No.1. The marriage between respondent No.2 \\aa 1 and accused No. I was performed on 16.11.2016, and s nce then, they have been living separately. At no point of time le petitioners resided with them. He further submitted that respondeir No.2 issued a legal notice through her counsel to accused No.l ' 'n 17.01.2020 seeking an amicable settlement, to which accused Nt'. gave a reply notice on 20.07.2020. Thereafter, respondent No'2 lott1 ed the present complaint on 13.04.2021, implicating the petitioners er d other family members. Even according to the allegations made in tf : complaint as well as the charge sheet, the ingredients of the allege I offences are not attracted against the petitioners.

5. He also submitted that respondent No.2 r rade omnibus allegations against the petitioners and accused Nos j to 9 and the major allegations are levelled only against accused '1o.1. Accused Nos.5 to t had approached this Court and filed Crl.P.l' o.266 of 2022 seeking quashment of proceedings, and the same \v ts allowed on

11.03.2025. Therefore, on the same grounds, the petil oners are also entitled to the same benefit.

6. Per contra, Ieamed counsel for respondent No.Z submitted that there are specific allegations against the petitioners, and they also lived along with accused No.l and respondent Nc 2. He further submitted that basing on the grounds pleaded in the o esent criminal 'rl r':9;;;..+i.; ;t$i!*; ,'..,io: " -. 4 petition, the petitioners are not entitled to seek quashment of proceedings. He further submitted that the contentions raised by the \ learned counsel for the petitioners involves disputed question offacts, and the same has to be adjudicated by the trial Court after a full- fledged trial. He further submitted that merely because the proceedings against accused Nos.5 to 9 were quashed in Crl.p.No.266 of 2022, the petitioners are not entitled to seek quashment of proceedings.

7. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the marriage of accused No.l with respondent No.2 was solemnized on 16.11.2016. Upon perusal of the allegations made in the complaint, it reveals that the major allegations are levelled against accused No.l, who is alleged to have had an illicit relationship with other women. The only allegation levelled against the petitioners is that, while suppressing the fact of the illicit relationship of accused No.1 with other women, they performed his marriage with respondent No.2. The record further reveals that respondent No.2 had issued a legal notice ot 17 .07 .2020, to which accused No. I gave a reply notice on 20.07.2020. Subsequently, respondent No.2 lodged the present complaint on 13.04.2021. Ik:*:- , I 7 5

8. The record further discloses that respondent rlo.2 has made similar allegations against the petitioners and accuseC Nos.5 to 9 and they approached this Court and hled Crl.p.No.266 ,.:'2022 and this Court while relying upon the principles laid down ,y the Hon,ble Apex Court in Preethi Gupta v. State of Jharkanat and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lail quashed, the proceedings ag r nst them.

9. It is not in dispute that petitioner No.l/accu;,d No.2 is the brother of accused No. l, petitioner No.2/accused No.. is the mother of accused No. 1 and petitioner No.3/accused No.4 is r ister_in_law of accused No.l and they are residing separately. Wherr rs, respondent No.2 and accused No.l have been living together subs :quent to their marriage.

10. Taking into consideration the facts and circurr;tances of the case and also order of this Cou( dated 1 1.03.2025 in C 1.p.No.266 of 2022, this Court is of the considered view that the ,: rntinuation of proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 4 i r C.C.No.245 of 2021 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Alamtr ur, is a clear abuse of process of law, and the same is liable to bt: quashed, and accordingly quashed. ' 1zo toy z scc 6u z ' I992 Supp (l) SCC 33s \ I -':-+r''.tY--- i-.- l ---\-ffi'\':i 1 1. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed. 6 Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// D/- P PONNA KRISHNA SISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To I 1 The Station House Officer, Undavally police Stati District. o , Jogulamba Gadwal 2. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at 3. One CC to Sri. N Krishna Sumanth, Advocate [OpUC] 4. One CC to Ms. Rupa Devi, Advocate [OpUC] 5. Two CD Copies. Hyderabad IOUT] PM/PSL HIGH COURT DATED:1011112025 ORDER CRLP.No.10266 of 2021 /,: 7 /:. ) 11 t:,'.i ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION. a{ ..\iI 1r. \\ i ffii) ,+/ ', ".;l