IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to consider the overall circumstances leading to the initiation of a case, assess the frivolous and vexatious nature of the prosecution, and take into account the parties' consensus before higher courts.

ORDER :

1. This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/A1 to A3 in C.C.No.8986 of 2021 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 498-A, 506 of IPC, Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. Brief facts of the case according to the defacto complainant/2nd respondent are that, her marriage with A1 was performed on 08.02.2015. The defacto complainant and A1 were acquainted with each other prior to marriage. One week after marriage, both A1 and the defacto complainant left to USA, where they were working. At the time of marriage, the father of the defacto complainant spent Rs.25.00 lakhs and also presented 700 grams of gold in the form of ornaments. Expensive gifts were given to the family members. A demand was made by petitioners to transfer house plot at Kadapa worth Rs.90.00 lakhs in the name of 1st petitioner. During the trip to Europe in the month of May, 2017, A1 behaved rudely with her. Both were earning and A1 exploited her financially and she did not have freedom of spending her own money. A1 bought two cars for himself and did not allow her to purchase jewellery or clothes of her choice. The conduct of A1 was getting abnormal. However, the parents of A1 supported him and did not ask A1 to mend his ways. Son was born on 15.12.2019. During November, 2016, the defacto complainant returned to India and she was humiliated by the petitioners. During her delivery also, she developed issues and also after delivery. However, petitioners did not take car of her. On 24.06.2020, A1 deserted her and started living in separate residence, having filed for divorce in the USA.

3. Thereafter, there were differences regarding child custody. Ultimately, she was compelled to leave USA and came to India on 22.11.2020. Narrating the harassment, a complaint was filed with the police, which was investigated and charge sheet filed.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that one week after the marriage, A1 and defacto complainant left to USA and staying together in the US. None of the incidents have taken place in India and all the allegations leveled are in the US. For the said reason of there being no sanction under Section 188 of Cr.P.C, proceedings cannot be permitted to continue. Learned counsel further argued that divorce application was filed by A1 on 19.05.2020 and as a counter blast to the said divorce application, criminal complaint was filed on 23.11.2020 with false allegations. In fact, both of them have approached the Courts in the US regarding child custody. The parties have approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court and by order dated 16.03.2022, there was a consensus in between A1 and the defacto complainant regarding child custody and all the issues have been settled. Both A1 and the defacto complainant are staying in US and proceedings before the criminal Court are nothing but abuse of the process of the Court in the present circumstances.

5. In support of his contentions, he relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Iqbal alias Bala and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, (2023) 8 Supreme Court Cases 734, wherein it is held as follows:

“11. In frivolous or vexations proceedings, the court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection try to read in between the lines. The Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C or Article 226 of the constitution need not restrict itself only to the stage of a case but is empowered to take into account the over all circumstances leading to the initiation/registration of the case as well as the materials collected in the course of investigation.”

6. He also relied on the judgment in the case of Mahmood Ali and others v. State of U.P and others, 2023 SCC OnLine