Specific allegations are necessary for criminal charges in matrimonial disputes to prevent misuse of legal processes, as vague accusations do not meet the threshold for prosecution.

ORDER :

Juvvadi Sridevi, J.

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 3 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.3871 of 2022 pending on the file of the learned V Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Uppal (for short ‘trial Court’). The offences alleged against the petitioner- accused No.1 are under Sections 420, 417, 498-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’), whereas the offences alleged against the petitioner-accused No.3 are under Sections 498-A and 506 of IPC.

2. Heard Mr. Srinivas Emani, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State. Inspite of service of notice, there is no representation for respondent No.2-de facto complainant. Perused the record.

3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the petitioner-accused No.1 is the husband of the de facto complainant and petitioner-accused No.3 is his son. The marriage between the petitioner-accused No.1 and the de facto complainant was solemnized on 02.04.2009 and they were blessed with two children. Subsequently, in 2015, the de facto complainant came to know that petitioner-accused No.1 was already married and had four children from his first wife. In 2016, he convinced his first wife and took the de facto complainant to reside with them. But, after some days, due to disputes, his first wife and children, including the petitioner-accused No.3, harassed the de facto complainant and drove her and her children out of the house, withholding her marriage photos and jewellery. Later, petitioner-accused No.1 arranged a separate residence for them. After few days, he started harassing her physically and mentally, accusing her of illicit relations and neglecting her and her children. In 2019, upon the retirement of petitioner-accused No.1, when the de facto complainant requested him to deposit some amount in the name of their daughters, he refused on the pretext that no dowry was given at the time of marriage, and harassed her.

4. It is contended by the learned counsel for petitioners that the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 3 are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the case by the de facto complainant, only to wreck vengeance in view of the matrimonial disputes. There is an unexplained delay in lodging the complaint and the de facto complainant is in the habit of filing cases by fabricating stories of marriage and cheating. All the witnesses are family members of de facto complainant and they are interested witnesses. The petitioner-accused No.1 is a retired person suffering from old age ailments. Except bald and general allegations, no specific overt acts are attributed to the petitioners. Thus, he prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor contended that the petitioners herein have harassed the de facto complainant after her marriage with petitioner-accused No.1. It is further contended that all the allegations levelled in the complaint as well as in the charge sheet are subject matter of trial, and hence, this is not a fit case to quash the proceedings at this stage. Accordingly, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

6. For the sake of convenience, Section 498-A of IPC is extracted hereunder:

498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.—

Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such wom