The court emphasized the need to carefully consider the allegations in the complaint and the overall circumstances before quashing criminal proceedings, and highlighted the importance of balancing law enforcement power and protection of citizens from unjust proceedings.

JUDGMENT

1. The instant petition under Sec. 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973[for short Cr.P.C"] has been filed by the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3, seeking quashment of proceedings against them in C.C.No.578 of 2021 on the file of the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Amalapuram, East Godavari District, for the offences punishable under Ss. 420, 464, 468 and 472 read with 34of the Indian Penal Code[for short I.P.C."].

2. Brief facts of the case, as projected by the de-facto complainant;

a. Accused No.1 is the mother-in-law and Accused No.2 is the wife of de facto complainant/husband. A.3 is the daughter of A.1. A.4 is the brother of A.1. A.5 is the sister-in-law of A.1. A.6 to A.8 are the relatives of A.1. Marriage of the de facto complainant with A.2 was performed on 13/12/2014 at Annavaram, as per Hindu rites and customs. The couple was blessed with a male child.

b. It is averred that A.2 gave de facto complainant, the first shock in their matrimonial life, by revealing that she was in relationship with a person while she was staying at Visakhapatnam, prior to the marriage. Without giving much weight to the same, the de-facto complainant continued the matrimonial life.

c. It is further stated that the de facto complainant got second shock when he came to know from the reliable sources and also from the death certificate of A.2"s father that their surname is Seeram" instead of Srirambhotla". His marriage with A.2 was performed with false surname as Srirambhotla", along with false caste name. It is his case that the Accused suppressed about their caste before the marriage and intentionally and deliberately cheated the de facto complainant.

d. It is further stated that, when confronted, A.2 abused him in filthy language and left the matrimonial home on 10/5/2018 threatening that she would make the complainant"s life drastic. It is stated that thereafter she lodged a false complaint against the de facto complainant for offence under Sec. 498-A r/w 34 I.P.C. and Ss. 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 by dragging his parents, brother and tried her level best to torture the family of the de facto complainant.

e. Complainant approached Amalapuram Town Police on 6/7/2018 to give compliant. Father of A.2 was a government employee, who died while in service. His death certificate was registered on 23/10/1998. The Inspector of Police called A.1 and A.2 to the Police Station to enquire about the same. It is further stated that on 26/7/2018, A.1 and A.2 approached the Amalapuram Police Station and showed death certificate showing the name as "Srirambhotla Apparao" instead of "Seeram Apparao". The earlier death certificate obtained from Mee Seva showed the name as "SeeramApparao". The de facto complainant has obtained the acknowledgment of his complaint with receipt No.627/18.

f. It is further stated that the de facto complainant approached the District Collector, East Godavari and filed a complaint regarding the change of death certificate of his father-in-law after 20 years. On enquiry, an endorsement was issued by the Additional Commissionercum-Municipal Birth and Death Registrar, Kakinada that the death certificate of Seeram Apparao as Srirambhotla Apparao, was changed pursuant to receiving an application from A-1.

g. It is further stated that, in order to manipulate the evidence, A.1 has created a fake voter I.D card with the help of photoshop and created false surname of her husband as Srirambhotla and approached Mee Seva Centre with a fake Voter I.D card, along with notarized affidavit and made an application for change of surname of her husband as Srirambhotla. The de facto complainant also stated that, believing the said documents as genuine, the Municipal Authorities have changed the surname as Srirambhotla without any enquiry.

h. On 23/8/2018 the de facto complainant has presented a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Kakinada, but no action was taken. He made a complaint before the Chie