IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J.
Smt. Andekar Laxmibai - Appellant
Vs.
The State of Telangana - Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 8014 of 2023
Decided On : 07-08-2025
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 5 seeking to quash the criminal proceedings against them in C.C.No.420 of 2023 on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate at Medak. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 4 98-A of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (for short ‘IPC’) and Sections 3 , 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act (for short ‘the Act’).
2. Heard Sri P. Srihari Nath, learned counsel for the petitioners-accused and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State-respondent No.1. No representation on behalf of the respondent No.2. Perused the record.
3. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that the marriage between accused No.1 and respondent No.2 was solemnized on 04.05.2022, and they lived together happily for two months. Thereafter, the accused No.1 and the petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 5 subjected her to physical and mental harassment by demanding her to give her total gold to them. They even beat the respondent No.2 and necked out her from the matrimonial home. Aggrieved by the said harassment, the respondent No.2 lodged the present complaint, alleging offences under Section 4 98-A of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Act.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 5 has no involvement whatsoever in the alleged offences and has never subjected the respondent No.2 to any form of harassment. It is submitted that the petitioners-accused Nos.2 and 3 are parents and the petitioner-accused Nos.4 and 5 are the sisters of the accused No.1. They never interfered in the matrimonial affairs between the respondent No.2 and the accused No.1. The petitioners have neither demanded dowry from the respondent No.2 nor from her parents at any point of time. It is further contended that there are no specific or direct allegations made against the petitioners in the charge sheet. The contents of the same do not disclose the essential ingredients necessary to constitute offences under Section 4 98-A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Act. Hence, he prayed to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 5.
5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State-respondent No.1 submitted that there are specific allegations against the petitioners and the truth or otherwise would come out only after conducting trial by the concerned Court and prayed to dismiss the Criminal Petition.
6. A perusal of the entire record reveals that after the marriage in the year 2022, the respondent No.2 and accused No.1 lived together happily for two months. It is evident from the record that the petitioners-accused Nos.2 and 3 are the old aged parents of the accused No.1. The petitioners-accused Nos.4 and 5 are the married sisters of the accused No.1 and they are living separately with their families.
7. In Geddam Jhansi and another v. State of Telangana and others , 2025 INSC 160 wherein the Honourable Supreme Court at Paragraph Nos. 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 and 38 held that:
“31. Invoking criminal process is a serious matter with penal consequences involving coercive measures, which can be permitted only when specific act(s) which constitute offences punishable under the penal code or any other penal statute are alleged or attributed to the accused and a prima facie case is made out. It applies with equal force when criminal laws are invoked in domestic disputes. Criminalising domestic disputes without specific allegations and credible materials to support the same may have disastrous consequences for the institution of family, which is built on the premise of love, affection, cordiality and mutual trust. Institution of family constitutes the core of human society. Domestic relationships, such as those between family members, are guided by deeply ingrained social values and cultural expectations. These relationships are often viewed as sacred, demanding a higher level of respect, commitment, and emotional investment compared to
Dara Lakshmi Narayana and others v. State of Telangana and another
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.