IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that specific allegations are necessary to proceed with dowry harassment cases against relatives, to prevent misuse of legal provisions.

ORDER :

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J.

The instant petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, [for short ‘Cr.P.C’] has been filed by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 and 5, seeking quashment of proceedings against them in C.C.No.789 of 2020 on the file of the Court of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kadapa registered for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, [for short ‘IPC’] and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, [for short ‘D.P.Act’].

2. Petitioners herein are the sister and brother-in-law of Accused No.1.

3. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows :

(a) The marriage of Respondent No.2/Complainant with Accused No.1 was performed on 29.11.2015 at Chennai as per Hindu rites and caste customs.

(b) At the time of marriage, on the demand of Accused Nos.1 to 4, the parents of the Complainant gave cash of Rs.15.00 lakhs, 125 sovereigns of gold, 5 kgs of silver and house site worth Rs.5 lakhs towards dowry.

(c) In addition to that, the parents of the Complainant also gave Rs.50,000/- to Accused No.1 for his clothes and Rs.1,00,000/- to Petitioner/Accused No.4 towards Adapaduchu Lanchanams.

(d) On the day of engagement, they also gave silver jug and diamond rings to the Complainant and Accused No.1.

(e) On the next day of engagement, the parents of the Complainant also gave Rs.10,00,000/- to the Accused in the presence of senior paternal uncle and aunt of the Complainant.

(f) After the marriage, all the Accused started harassing the Complainant by demanding additional dowry.

(g) Accused No.1 used to beat the Complainant and all the Accused subjected her to mental cruelty.

(h) Accused Nos.2 to 5 used to threaten the Complainant stating that they would perform another marriage to Accused No.1, if she fails to bring additional dowry.

(i) After delivering a male child, the Complainant was dropped at her parental home stating that she became fat.

(j) Though the father of the Complainant tried to send her to the matrimonial home, all the Accused did not allow her by demanding additional dowry.

(k) As such, Respondent No.2/Complainant lodged a report with Chinnachowk U/G Police Station, Kadapa against Accused Nos.1 to 5 and the same was registered as a case in Crime No.296 of 2019 for the offences punishable under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P.Act. After completion of investigation, Police filed charge sheet against all the Accused for the said offences.

4. Grounds for quashment:

Aggrieved by the registration of the said case, the present petition is filed by Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash the proceedings against them in the above C.C on the following grounds :

(i) Petitioners herein are innocent persons and they have nothing to do with the matrimonial life of Respondent No.2 and Accused No.1.

(ii) Petitioners are falsely implicated in the present case in order to make Accused No.1 to heed to the illegal demands of Respondent No.2.

(iii) Petitioners herein were married on 04.03.2012 and they have been living separately in Nellore and the family of Respondent No.2 is at Chennai.

(iv) Having addicted to lead a lavish lifestyle, Respondent No.2 herself left the matrimonial society.

(v) There are no specific allegations against the Petitioners either in the complaint or in the charge sheet.

(vi) No specific overt acts were attributed against the Petitioners to attract the alleged offences against them. Therefore, continuation of proceedings against the Petitioners is an abuse of process of law.

Arguments Advanced at the Bar

5. Heard Ms. K. Pallavi, learned counsel for the Petitioners, Ms. D. Prasanna Lakshmi learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for State/Respondent No.1 and Sri Rosedar S.R.A., learned counsel for Respondent No.2.

6. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit;

Petitioners herein are Accused Nos.4 and 5, who are the married sister-in-law and her husband.

Except omnibus allegations, there are no specific allegations attributed against the Pe