ORDER:

This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short “Cr.P.C.”) to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.329 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chepurupalli, registered for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code (for short “I.P.C.”) and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. Petitioners herein are arrayed as the accused Nos.1 to 5. Respondent No.2 is the de-facto-complainant. The case of the prosecution is that the respondent No.2 filed a complaint stating that marriage of the defacto- complainant with Accused No.1 took place on 22.06.2003 as per the Hindu rites and customs. Since it was a love marriage, she did not bring any dowry. Following the marriage, she lived with her in-laws (Accused Nos.2 to 5) at Ambedkar Colony, Cheepurupalliand begotten a male child. Due to insufficient space, accused No.2 directed the complainant and the accused No.1 to live in a rented house and return the house after the marriage of accused No.3 was arranged. On that both the defacto-complainant and Accused No.1 resided in a rented house at Ramanjaneya colony. When she requested Accused No.1 to take her back to the in-laws' house, he demanded Rs.3 lakhs from her parents to facilitate Accused No.3's marriage. The complainant further alleges that Accused No.1 returns home in a drunken state and beat indiscriminately, and subjected her to mental agony by demanding dowry, when she visited her in-laws' house, Accused Nos.2 and 3 allegedly continued to harass her, accusing her for not bringing any dowry and threatened to arrange Accused No.1‟s marriage with another woman who could get more dowry. Accused Nos.4 and 5 also allegedly abused the complainant, stating that if Accused No.1 married to another woman, she would bring a higher dowry. Accused No.3 marriage was performed in the year 2016 but Accused No.3 and her husband still live at the complainant's in-laws' house. The complainant further stated that all accused members demanded Rs.3 lakhs as dowry, and when she was unable to meet demands, they forcibly expelled her from the house, throwing out her belongings.

3. The brief facts of the case are that, after the marriage of the defacto- complainant with the 1st petitioner/Accused No.1 they lived in a rented accommodation in Ramanjaneya Colony, Cheepurupalli. Out of their wedlock, they begotten one male child. Over the time, financial difficulties led to marital discord. The 1st petitioner proposed to live with the 2nd petitioner but the 2nd respondent bluntly refused. The 4th petitioner, who married the 5th petitioner in 1996, has lived separately with their children and has no connection to the 1st petitioner‟s family matters. Moreover, the 3rd petitioner married one Karagana Simhachalam on 25.08.2016 and has lived with her in-laws since then. As the 1st petitioner and the 2nd respondent/defacto- complainant lived happily in a rented house with their male child aged 14 years, the other petitioners are no way connected with their family affairs. Despite initially living together for a period of eight (08) years, the 2nd respondent/defacto-complainant developed a drinking habit and engaged in extramarital relationships with individuals including Rambabu (a Panchayat E.O.) and Pisini Laxmana Rao, among others. Upon noticing the same, when the 1st petitioner questioned the acts, she kept the deaf fear and continued to maintain the same for two years. The 1st petitioner faced severe mental distress due to the 2nd respondent's conduct and was often denied food and basic needs. This situation resulted in significant hardship and sleepless nights for the 1st petitioner. Hence, prays to allow the petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners also filed memo dated 09.09.2024 along with Lok Adalat award, complaint in DVC and medical report of the petitioner No.1.

(i) Wherein the lok adalat award was passed as follows:

“…1. The 1st petitioner and respondent ar