THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

CRIMINAL PETITION No. 8887 OF 2024

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik

Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short ‘the BNSS’), seeking quashment of proceedings against the petitioner in C.C. No. 2318 of 2021, on the file of the learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIX Additional Metropolitan

Magistrate, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri.

2. The petitioner is arrayed as Accused No.5 in the Calendar Case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 494, 495, 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter ‘IPC’), Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Section 3 of the

Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.

3. I have heard learned counsel appearing on respective parties.

4. The prosecution alleges that Accused No.1 entered into marriage with Respondent No.2/ de facto complainant on 27.11.2020. At the time of the marriage, it is claimed that, in response to a demand from the accused, Respondent No.2’s parents provided a dowry consisting of Rs.8,00,000/- in cash, 20 tolas of gold, ½ kilogram of silver, various household articles, and an additional Rs.1,00,000/- specifically for the purchase of a motorcycle,

resulting in a total expenditure of approximately Rs.10,00,000/-.

Following the marriage, Respondent No.2 was allegedly subjected to physical and mental harassment by all the accused for further dowry demands. This conduct is asserted to amount to cruelty within the meaning of applicable penal provisions. Accused No.1, being employed in the Indian Army, departed for Jharkhand on 22.12.2020 to report for duty. After his departure, Accused Nos.2 to 4 allegedly continued to harass the Respondent No.2, both physically and mentally, ultimately expelling her from the matrimonial home.

It is further alleged that on 29.12.2020, Accused No.1 unilaterally pronounced Triple Talaq, purportedly in accordance with Muslim personal law, without securing a lawful decree of divorce from a competent Court. Thereafter, he is said to have contracted a second marriage with the petitioner, arrayed as Accused No.5. In consequence, Respondent No.2 filed a criminal complaint, following which a police investigation culminated in the filing of a charge sheet against all the accused, including the present petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she has been falsely implicated as Accused No.5, and that the complaint fails to disclose the essential ingredients of any cognizable offence, particularly with reference to Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which addresses the offence of marrying again during the lifetime of a spouse. The petitioner categorically denies the allegation that Accused No.1 has not lawfully dissolved his marriage with Respondent No.2 through pronouncement of Triple Talaq.

In support of her plea for quashing the proceedings, the petitioner relies on a decision rendered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Petition No. 10845 of 2022, wherein proceedings against Accused Nos. 2 to 4 were quashed due to the absence of specific, substantiated allegations against them. Drawing a parallel, the petitioner contends that the present complaint similarly fails to attribute any overt act or culpable conduct to her that would justify her prosecution.

6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the petition, contending that the legality of the alleged pronouncement of Talaq by Accused No.1 and the validity of his subsequent marriage to the petitioner/Accused No.5 are matters that require judicial determination during the course of trial. It is therefore submitted that the quash petition is premature and merits dismissal at this stage. 7. I have perused the materials on record.

8. The charge sheet and accompanying prosecution records allege that Accused No.1 entered into a second marriage with the petitioner/Accused No.5 without first obtaining a valid and l