IMPORTANT POINT
Only relatives of the husband can be charged under Section 498-A IPC, necessitating strict interpretation of the law.

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.6 and 7, seeking quashment of proceedings against them in C.C.No.49 of 2018 on the file of the Court of VI Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur, registered for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code,1860, [for short "IPC"] and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, [for short "D.P.Act"].

2. The brief case, as per the charge sheet, is as follows:

a. Marriage of the Respondent No.2/Complainant with the Accused No.1 was performed and at the time of marriage, parents of Complainant gave Rs.1,00,000/- to Accused No.1 and got opened a Cell Point Shop by Accused No.1 and due to poor maintenance, the said shop was closed. Thereafter, Accused No.1, at the instigation of Accused Nos.2 and 3, started harassing the Complainant by demanding additional dowry.

b. As such, the Complainant filed a case vide C.C.No.457 of 2009 against Accused Nos.1 to 3 at Old Guntur Police Station and the same was compromised between the parties in Lok Adalat on 02.02.2010 before this Court with a direction to Accused No.1 to look after the welfare of the Complainant. But, the Accused No.1 continued his harassment towards the Complainant, at the instigation of Accused Nos.2 to 7.

c. Accused No.1 left the complainant when they were residing at Chilakaluripet and went away to Kerala and having no other go, the Complainant has been residing along with her parents. When the Complainant contacted Accused Nos.2 to 7 and asked the whereabouts of Accused No.1, they abused her in filthy language and also threatened with dire consequences. Hence, the Complainant lodged, the present complaint, vide Cr.No.211 of 2013 for the offences under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P. Act. Police after due investigation, filed charge sheet against Accused Nos.1 to 4 for the above said offences, which was numbered as C.C.No.49 of 2018 on the file of the Court of VI Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur.

Grounds sought for quashment:

3. Aggrieved by the registration of the said case, the present petition is filed by Petitioners/Accused Nos.6 and 7 to quash the proceedings against them in the above C.C on the following grounds :

a. Petitioners were implicated in the present case without there being any reason and though the Petitioners are not at all the relatives of Accused No.1.

b. No offence is made out against the Petitioners.

c. Since the Petitioners are not the blood relatives of Accused No.1, the offences under Section 498-A IPC does not attract against them.

d. There are no specific allegations against the Petitioners.

Arguments Advanced at the Bar

4. Heard Sri P.V.N. Kiran Kumar, learned counsel for the Petitioners and Ms. D. Prasanna Lakshmi learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for State/Respondent No.1. Despite service of notice, none appeared for Respondent No.2.

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the Petitioners are Accused Nos.6 and 7, who are the owners of the house where the Complainant and Accused No.1 resided for some time and that the Petitioners are not the relatives of Accused No.1. It is submitted further that the Petitioners are Christians, whereas, Accused No.1 is a Muslim and since the Petitioners interfered to resolve the disputes between the couple, the present case has been lodged by implicating the Petitioners. It is concluded that the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.6 and 7 is an abuse of process of law.

6. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that there are no grounds to interfere and would submit that as per the charge sheet, Petitioners are the relatives of Accused No.1, whereas, in the complaint, Respondent No.2 never stated that the Petitioners are the relatives of Accused No.1.

Point for Determination

7. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel r