APHC010446702021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3333]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6530/2021 Between:

Didla Mary Roselind @ Sarapu Rajilind ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S)

Others Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

1. S DILIP JAYA RAM Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following:

ORDER

This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short “Cr.P.C.”) to quash the proceedings in F.I.R.No.142 of 2021 on the file of Woman Police Station, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District.

2. The petitioner herein is accused No.2 and is the mother of accused No.1. The 2^nd respondent is the defacto complainant and the wife of accused No.1. On 17.08.2021, the 2^nd respondent herein has filed a complaint before the police stating that she got married with the accused No.1 who belongs to Ganesh nagar, Rajahmundry, on 21.10.2015 at Holy Trinity Church, Near Aanam Kalakendram, Rajahmundry as per Christian Tradition. It is further stated that they have given Rs.5,00,000/- to the petitioner herein at the time of marriage as dowry. Thereafter, the 2^nd respondent started leading her life at matrimonial home and was blessed with a daughter. Subsequently, the accused No.1 and the petitioner herein are alleged to have tortured the 2^nd respondent for additional dowry though she has repaid Rs.8,00,000/- of debts which was taken by the 1^st accused. As the 1^st accused is irresponsible, the 2^nd respondent along with her daughter went to her parents house with a hope that the behaviour of the 1^st accused would change. The 1^st accused has sold away the vehicle bought by the 2^nd respondent, mortgaged the marriage chain of the 2^nd respondent and has also mortgaged the vehicle of the father of the 2^nd respondent. Though the 2^nd respondent went back to the matrimonial house to lead marital life with the 1^st accused, he did not change and started torturing for additional dowry of Rs.5,00,000/-. It is further stated that the petitioner herein has also tortured the 2^nd respondent verbally without understanding the problems of the 2^nd respondent. Stating thus, the 2^nd respondent requested the Police to initiate necessary action against the accused and accordingly, the Police have registered a case vide FIR.No.142 of 2021 on 17.08.2021 against the accused, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 read with 34 IPC and Sections 3,4 of D.P. Act. Seeking quashment of the said proceedings, the petitioner i.e. the 2^nd accused has filed the present petition.

3. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the contents of the complaint and has sought quashment of the FIR on the ground that the allegations made in the complaint against the petitioner herein are vague and there is no absolute allegation that the 2^nd respondent was put to harassment by the petitioner herein. In order to attract the offences under Section 498-A of IPC, it has to be categorically established that the allegations are of such nature as to drive the woman to commit suicide. The 2^nd respondent has casually mentioned the name of the petitioner herein and no specific allegation was raised by the 2^nd respondent. As such, the proceedings in FIR.No.142 of 2021 on the file of Woman Police Station, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District have to be quashed against the petitioner.

4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor contended that the allegations levelled against the petitioner would constitute offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 read with 34 IPC and Sections 3,4 of D.P. Act, therefore, the proceedings against the petitioner cannot be quashed at this stage. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

5. When the criminal petition came up for hearing on 22.11.2021, this Court has pass