IMPORTANT POINT
Judicial orders must be reasoned, and relatives in matrimonial disputes should not be implicated without specific allegations.

ORDER :

Criminal petition Nos.45 of 2019 and 500 of 2019 are filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the docket order dated 17.05.2017 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate of First class, Badvel whereby the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the accused Nos.2 to 8 for the offence punishable under Section 498-A, 494, 420, 120(B) read with 34 of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. The petitioners in Crl.P.No. 45 of 2019 are accused Nos.2 to 4 and the petitioner in Crl.P.No.500 of 2019 is accused No.5. Respondent No.2 in both the petitions is one and the same. Since both the petitions are filed seeking to quash the docket order dated 17.05.2017 by the different accused, these petitions are taken up together for disposal by way of common order.

3. Accused No.2 is the mother of accused No.1, accused No.3 is the father of accused No.1, accused No.4 is the younger brother of accused No.1, and accused No.5 is the sister of accused No.1. The 2nd respondent herein is the de-facto complainant and is the wife of accused No.1.

4. The 2nd respondent/defacto complainant lodged a complaint with the police alleging that she is a resident of Porumamilla Town, YSR Kadapa District and her marriage was performed with accused No.1 on 25.04.2012 at TTD marriage function hall, Badvel. After marriage, both of them started conjugal life at Hyderabad and lived happily for some time. Later accused No.1 informed that he is working as Manager at a company in Saudi Arabia and that as he came here on one month leave, he shall return to Saudi Arabia, if not he would be put to a loss of Rs.1,00,000/-. Accordingly, he went to Saudi Arabia stating that he would come soon with visa and promised to take defacto complainant back to Saudi Arabia. After five months, the accused came back to Hyderabad for one month, but did not apply for visa of the defacto complainant. During the said period, the defacto complainant became pregnant and subsequently, the accused No.1 went back to Saudi Arabia. After residing for three months with the parents of accused No.1 i.e. accused Nos. 2 and 3, the complainant went back to her parental home as she was advised by the doctor to take bed rest. Thereafter, the complainant gave birth to twins, but they were dead after five days. After ten days, accused No.1 came back from Saudi Arabia and quarreled with the complainant stating that as she is suffering from joints disease she was unable to give birth properly. Thereafter, accused No.1 started harassing the respondent No.2 physically and mentally. When the respondent No.2 has informed the same to her parents, she was taken back to the parental home. Subsequently, the accused No.1 filed a divorce petition as against the 2nd respondent which is pending before family Court, Kadapa. Thereafter, when there was a proposal of the accused No.1 to marry one Leelavathi, the brothers of respondent No.2 informed her parents about the previous marriage of the accused No.1 with the 2nd respondent; upon which the said proposal was withdrawn.

5. Basing on the complaint filed by the defacto complainant the police registered a case in Crime No.260 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 494, 420, 120(b) read with 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P. Act. During the course of investigation, investigating officer examined 9 witnesses and recorded their statements. As L.Ws 2 to 8 have not supported the version of the de-facto complainant, a charge sheet was filed as against accused No.1 only by deleting the names of other accused. And the same was numbered as C.C.No.305 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Badvel. Aggrieved by the action of police in deleting the names of accused Nos.2 to 8, the de-facto complainant filed requisition before the learned Magistrate requesting to take cognizance against all the accused including the petitioners herein for the offences referred above. On receipt of the said requisition lea