ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

1. The petitioner’s mother-in-law and father-in-law are before this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.577/2023 instituted against them for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 of the IPC.

2. Heard learned counsel Sri.V.P.Vadavi for the petitioners, learned AGA Sri.T.Hanumareddy for the respondent- State and the learned counsel Sri.Neelendra D.Gunde appearing for respondent No.2.

3. Facts in brief germane are as follows:

The 2^nd respondent is the complainant, wife of accused No.1, who is not before this Court. The petitioners are accused Nos.2 and 3, the mother-in-law and father-in-law. The marriage of the accused No.1 and the complainant, 2^nd respondent takes place on 03.05.2021 and the relationship between the two appears to have floundered and floundering of the relationship, wife instituted several proceedings one such proceeding is the registration of a crime in Crime No.4/2023 for the afore-quoted offences against the accused, husband and several other members of the family. The police conduct investigation and dropped the others and filed a charge sheet against the mother- in-law, father-in-law and the husband. The filing of the charge sheet is what has driven the petitioners to this Court in subject petition.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that a perusal of the complaint or the summary of the charge sheet as obtaining in Column No.17 would not indicate any offences against these petitioners while the offences are completely quoted against the accused No.1, husband. The learned counsel submits that the permitting further proceedings against the mother-in-law and father-in-law would become contrary to law.

5. The learned counsel Sri.Neelendra D.Gunde appearing for the respondent No.2 would submit that the mother-in-law and father-in-law also are alleged of certain torture which is clearly brought out in Column No.17 of the charge sheet. Therefore this Court should not interfere with the said findings and it is for the petitioners to come out clean in a full blown trial along with the accused No.1.

6. The learned AGA would also toe the lines of the learned counsel appearing for the complainant.

7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submission made by both the learned counsels for the parties and perused the material available on record.

8. The afore-narrated facts linked in the chain of events are not in dispute, they are a matter of record. The relationship between the accused No.1 and the complainant flounders and the complainant registers a crime before the jurisdictional police in Crime No.4 of 2023 for offences as afore-quoted including the offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Since the entire issue triggered from the complaint, I deem it appropriate to notice the complaint, which reads as follows:

9. The police conduct investigation and filed a charge sheet against the accused Nos.1, 2 and 3, the husband, mother- in-law and father-in-law. The summary of the charge sheet as obtaining in Column No.17, reads as follows:

10. A perusal of the complaint and the summary of the charge sheet would not indicate any overt act against these petitioners, mother-in-law and father-in-law, while the entire offences are alleged against the husband, accused No.1, who is not before the Court. Permitting further proceedings against the mother-in-law and father-in-law would run foul of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Shobhit Kumar Mittal Vs.State of Uttar Pradesh¹, has held as follows:

“15. Similarly, an offence is punishable under Section 498A of the IPC when a husband or his relative subjects a woman to cruelty, which may result in imprisonment for a term extending up to three years and a fine. The Explanation under Section 498A of the IPC defines “cruelty” for the purpose of Section 498A of the IPC to mean any of the acts mentioned in clauses (a) or (b) therein. The first lim