The court held that vague allegations in matrimonial disputes do not justify prosecution, emphasizing the necessity for specific and substantiated claims against each accused to prevent misuse of legal provisions.

ORDER :

JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J.

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 5 seeking quashment of the proceedings against them in C.C.No.21 of 2023 pending on the file of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Yadadri-Bhuvanagiri District at Bhongir. The offences alleged against the petitioner-accused No.1 are under Sections 498-A, 506 and 494 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “IPC”) and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act (for short, “the Act”), while the accused Nos.2 to 5 are alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 and 494 read with Section 109 of IPC and Section 4 of the Act.

02. Heard Sri Veera Babu Gandu, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms.Saleha Begum, learned Legal Aid counsel for the respondent No.2 and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-respondent No.1. Perused the record.

03. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that the marriage between the petitioner-accused No.1 and the respondent No.2 was a love marriage solemnized on 06.02.2008, and they were blessed with two children. It is alleged that thereafter the accused No.1 developed an illicit relationship with accused No.6, and the accused Nos.2 to 5 supported the accused No.1. On account of the same, the respondent No.2 filed a case against them in the year 2016 vide Crime No.03 of 2016 for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. It is further alleged that in the year 2018, the accused Nos.1 to 5 promised to take care of the respondent No.2 and took her back to her matrimonial home, where accused No.1 and respondent No.2 lived happily till 2019. It is further alleged that thereafter accused Nos.1 to 5 again demanded the respondent No.2 to bring dowry of Rs.10 lakhs and one acre of land, assaulted her, drove her out of the house, and threatened to kill her and her children. It is alleged that the respondent No.2 placed the matter before the elders; however, the accused Nos.1 to 5 did not heed their advice, and since then the respondent No.2 has been residing at her parents’ house. It is further alleged that in the year 2020, with the support of accused Nos.2 and 5, accused No.1 contracted a second marriage with accused No.6 without obtaining a divorce from respondent No.2, and accused No.6 was blessed with a male child. It is further alleged that a panchayat was held, and before the elders, accused Nos.1 to 5 admitted that they had performed the marriage of accused No.1 with accused No.6, and accused No.6 also admitted that she was aware that it was accused No.1’s second marriage. Based on these allegations, respondent No.2 lodged the present complaint for the above alleged offences.

04. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners have no involvement whatsoever in the alleged offences and that they never subjected respondent No.2 to any form of harassment. It is submitted that the petitioner-accused No.1 is the husband, the petitioners- accused Nos.2 and 3 are the parents of accused No.1 and the petitioners-accused Nos.4 and 5 are the sisters of accused No.1. It is further submitted that petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 5 never harassed respondent No.2, and that petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 5 never interfered in the matrimonial affairs between respondent No.2 and petitioner- accused No.1. It is contended that the petitioners have never made any demand for dowry from respondent No.2 and that there are no specific or substantive allegations against them. It is further submitted that the contents of the complaint and the charge sheet do not disclose the essential ingredients necessary to constitute the alleged offences. Hence, learned counsel prayed for quashing the proceedings against petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 5.

0