IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that specific allegations are necessary to proceed with charges under Section 498-A IPC to prevent misuse of the law in matrimonial disputes.

ORDER :

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J.

The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973[in short ‘Cr.P.C.’] has been filed, by the petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 7, seeking quashment of the proceedings against them in C.C. No.446 of 2021 on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ponnuru, for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act,1961.[in short ‘D.P. Act’]

2. Contents of the charge sheet in brief:

a. The marriage of the complainant was performed on 26.08.2021 with Accused No.1 in the case, who is the son of Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 herein, at Tirupathi. At the time of her marriage, on demand of A1 and his parents A2 & A3, her parents presented an amount of Rs.1 lakh, 1 sovereign gold ring and Rs.50,000/- worth household articles towards dowry.

b. They do not have any issues. A1/husband of the complainant is affected with polio. Her marriage with A1 was performed by believing the deceitful words of the petitioners saying that A1 studied B.Com, working in a private firm and gets Rs.30,000/- per month. After marriage, the complainant joined with A1and her in-laws at Dilsukhnagar. Sincethen, her in-laws/A2 & A3 used to harass her mentally. Later they shifted to Miyapur nearby her sister-in-law’s house.

c. A1 used to come home late night in drunken state and harass her by demanding additional dowry. Sometimes, he used to wear her dresses and behave unusual and subjected her to mental torture. On the instigation of petitioners/A2 to A7, husband of the defacto complainant/A1 used to beat her by demanding additional dowry. On 27.11.2018 at about 11.00 P.M., A1/husband of the complainant came in drunken state and picket up quarrel demanded to bring Rs.2 lakhs from her parents and with the support of all the petitioners/A2 to A7, beat her indiscriminately. Later all the petitioners beat her. Her mother-in-law and sister-in-law caught hold her tuft and her husband necked her out of the matrimonial house and threatened to kill if she fails to bring the additional amount demanded by the petitioners. The complainant reached to her parents’ house and her parents and elders tried to settle the issue, but in vain. Later the complainant presented a report in police station. Basing on the report given by the complainant, case was registered as Cr.No.83 of 2021 of Ponnuru Town Police Station and after investigation, the police filed charge sheet.

3. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners filed the present petition seeking quashment of the case against them on the following grounds:

a. There are no specific allegations against the petitioner Nos.5 and 6 except they have supported the husband of the complainant. They are not at all relatives of the husband falling under Section 498-A of I.P.C. They are no way connected to A1 as a relative.

b. Petitioner No.3/A4 who is the sister-in-law of the complainant and petitioner No.4/A5 is the husband of A4 are also no way connected to the family affairs of A1. The allegations against them are also vague.

c. A1 is a physically handicapped person. The complainant willingly accepted the marriage with A1.

d. In fact, on the day of alleged incident, the complainant along with A1 were present at her sister’s family in Mutnuru Village in Guntur District, a photo is also filed showing the same.

e. The complainant alleged that she was necked out of the house on 27.11.2018, but she gave the report on 24.04.2021, which is almost 2 ½ years after the alleged incident.

Arguments advanced at the Bar

4. Heard Sri Raja Reddy Koneti, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. D.Prasanna Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State/Respondent No.1. Despite notice served on Respondent No.2, none appeared.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners herein are A2 to A7 and that the offence alleged against the petitioners are for the offences punishable under Sectio