ORDER :

The present Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.578 of 2015 on the file of the Court of II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-Mahila Magistrate at Vijayawada, Krishna District.

2. The petitioners herein are arrayed as Accused Nos.1 to 4 in the said case for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act (for short ‘D.P. Act’).

3. Heard Smt.K.Sesha Rajyam, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr.A.Radha Krishna, learned counsel for the 1st respondent and Mr.Soora Sainath, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the 2nd respondent-State.

4. The brief facts of the case are that the daughter of the 1st respondent herein and the wife of the 1st petitioner by name Ms. Lakshmi Gowthami (herein after referred to as the de facto complainant) lodged a complaint on 16.06.2014 at Mahila Police Station, Vijayawada City, stating that her marriage was performed with the 1st petitioner on 14.06.2012 and that he was working at United States of America. As per the wishes of the 1st petitioner’s parents and grandfather, an amount of Rs.50,00,000/-towards dowry was given in the presence of one Mr.Boppana Subbarao at the time of engagement and that they also gave further sum of Rs.50,00,000/-to the 1st petitioner in the presence of his parents and grandfather at the time of marriage. In the said complaint, it is also stated that apart from the said amount, they gave 200 sovereigns of gold, two plots situated in Vijayawada and a Building situated at Hyderabad. In the complaint, it is further stated that after the marriage, the 1st petitioner/A.1 at the instigation of the other petitioners i.e., A.2 to A.4 abused the defacto complainant, threatened her, demanded to bring cash by disposing the properties as additional dowry and that they will not allow her to lead marital life with the 1st petitioner. It was stated that the de facto complainant informed her father i.e., the 1st respondent about the demand of additional dowry and thereafter she came down to India on her own as the 1st petitioner travelled to India alone without purchasing a ticket to the defacto-complainant. It is also stated that on enquiry, it is learnt that the 1st petitioner was in Bangalore, on request the 1st petitioner, his parents, grandfather came to Vijayawada and in the presence of elders viz., one Mr.Boppana Subbarao and Mr.Kodanda Bala Krishna, discussions took place and despite the advice of elders, the 1st petitioner, his parents as also his grandfather demanded additional dowry of Rs.8,00,00,000/-and told that the 1st petitioner would continue the matrimonial life only if an amount of Rs.8,00,00,000/-is paid. It is stated that thereafter she left to U.S.A., for studies and subsequently her husband i.e., the 1st petitioner came to U.S.A., there also he demanded additional dowry and his parents and grandfather continued to demand an amount of Rs.8,00,00,000/-towards additional dowry.

5. Pursuant to the said complaint, the police after registration of the crime for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of D.P. Act, conducted investigation and filed a final report on 27.02.2015 referring the case as ‘false’ after obtaining permission from the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Central Zone, Vijayawada. Aggrieved by the said final report, the 1st respondent who is father of the de facto complainant lodged a protest petition/complaint under Sections 190, 200 & 173(8) of Criminal Procedure Code (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’), the cognizance of which was taken in C.C.No.578 of 2015 on the file of the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-Mahila Magistrate at Vijayawada, Krishna District. Seeking to quash the same, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

6. Smt. Sesha Rajyam, learned Senior Counsel, inter-alia, submits 1st that the complaint of the daughter of the respondent da