In matrimonial disputes, criminal proceedings against relatives of the husband should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. where allegations are omnibus, vague, bereft of specific particulars, and lack any prima-facie evidence of active involvement in the alleged offence, as such trials constitute an abuse of process.

Petition under Section 437 /438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.478/2023 on the file of the Honourable Court of W Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tirupati for the offences U/sec. 498(A), 323, 506 IPC, Sec. 3 and 4 of the DP Act so far as Petitioners/Accused No.2 to 6 are concerned

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in C.C. No. 478/2023 on the file of the Honourable Court of IV Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tirupati for the offences U/sec. 498(A), 323, 506 IPC, Sec. 3 and 4 of the DP Act so far as Petitioners/Accused No.2 to 6 including appearance of the petitioners, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

1.D KISHORE KUMAR

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

2.VMR LEGAL

The Petitioners are accused 2 to 6 in C.C.No.478 of 2023 on the file of the learned IV Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati. A charge sheet has been filed against the petitioners and another for the offences punishable under Section 498A , 323, 506 IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. Brief facts of the case are as follows:

i) Marriage between accused No.1 and L.W.5-B.V.Bhavana was performed on 30.03.2018 in the presence of elders and relatives. At the time of marriage, parents of L.W.5-B.V.Bhavana gave dowry of Rs.20,00,000/- along with gold ornaments of 30 sovereigns and house hold articles worth Rs.2,00,000/- and also performed marriage by spending Rs.10,00,000/-. After marriage, Accused No.1 and L.W.5-B.V.Bhavana set up a family along with parents of accused No.1. Right from the marriage, accused No.1 and his family members used to abuse, ill-treat and assault L.W.5-B.V.Bhavana by stating that the dowry brought by her is very low.

ii) While so, accused No.1 left to USA, within two months after marriage and he cut off all communications with L.W.5-B.V.Bhavana. Later, L.W.5-B.V.Bhavana was forced to study MS at Canada and as such, father of L.W.5-B.V.Bhavana gave Rs.18,00,000/- to accused No.1, and L.W.5-B.V.Bhavana joined MS Course at Canada in the month of September, 2019. The family of accused No.1 used to compare L.W.5-B.V.Bhavana with the wife of younger brother of A.1 as she brought more dowry than her. Unable to bear the harassment, L.W.1-B.V.Lalitha filed a report vide Crime No.100 of 2022 of Disha Police Station, Tirupati, and after completion of investigation, police laid the charge sheet, which was taken on file as the aforesaid C.C.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the relatives of A1; that even accepting the entire accusations to be true, still prima facie case for the offences under Sections 498A IPC and 3 and 4 the Dowry Prohibition Act, would not be attracted as against the petitioners herein, for the reasons that the omnibus accusation has been made against the petitioners herein that of they have harassed the de-facto complainant for want of more dowry. He submits that even accepting that accusation, no specific act has been attributed as against the petitioners herein in the