IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI
Byorini Sarangapani – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRLP 9109/2024
##PAGE1##
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI
CRIMINAL PETITION No.9109 of 2024
18TH DECEMBER, 2025
Between:
Byorini Sarangapani and 5 others. … Petitioners
AND
The State of Telangana
Rep. through Public Prosecutor and 1 other …Respondents
O R D E R
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 6
seeking to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.137 of 2018
on the file of I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Warangal. The
offences alleged against the petitioners are under section 498-A of
Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act-1961 (for short ‘The Act’).
2. Heard Smt.K.Jayasree, learned counsel for the petitioners-accused
Nos.1 to 6 and Mr.M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State. None entered appearance for respondent No.2-
de facto complainant. Perused the record.
##PAGE2##2
3. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that the marriage of de facto
complainant was performed with accused No.1 on 01.05.2014. At the
time of marriage, her parents gave cash and gold ornaments towards
dowry. Later, petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2-de facto complainant
set up a family at Hafeezpet, Hyderabad and out of wedlock, she
became pregnant, but due to ill health her pregnancy was aborted.
Though it was informed to the petitioners that the de-facto complainant
was married earlier to another person and later her first marriage was
dissolved, but the petitioner No.1 under the guise of the first marriage
started harassing her to get additional dowry of Rs.2,00,000/- and the
petitioner Nos.2 to 6 herein supported him and thereby subjected her to
physical and mental harassment and demanded to give divorce to her
and driven her out of house. Basing on the said complaint, police
registered a case in Crime No.158 of 2017. Later the police completed
the entire investigation and filed charge sheet and the same was
numbered as C.C.No.137 of 2018 on the file of I Additional Judicial First
Class Magistrate, Warangal.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for petitioners that the petitioners
are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case by the de facto
complainant. Petitioner No.1 is the husband of de facto complainant, petitioner
##PAGE3##3
Nos.2 and 3 are parents of the 1st petitioner and petitioner Nos.4 and 6 are
brother and sister of the 1st petitioner and petitioner No.5 is the wife of the 4th
petitioner. The present complaint was lodged by the de facto complainant after
eleven years of her marriage with accused No.1. It is submitted that the de
facto complainant was already married and obtained divorce from her 1st
husband, but the said fact was not disclosed to the petitioners herein at the
time of marriage. When the de facto complainant and her parents were
questioned about the same, the de facto complainant to cover up the same,
lodged a complaint with all false and frivolous allegations. It is submitted that
there was no exchange of any dowry and when there was no exchange of
dowry, the question of harassing the de facto complainant for any dowry much
less the additional dowry does not arise. It is further submitted that in the cross
examination of the de facto complainant in C.C.No.137 of 2018 she deposed
that after filing this case she re-married another person namely Kakkanala
Suman reddy who is her third husband and blessed with two children.
Therefore, the proceedings against the petitioners are abuse of process of law.
Hence, he prays to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.
5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor contended
that all the allegations levelled in the complaint as well as in the charge sheet
are subject matter of trial, and hence, this is not a fit case to quash the
proceedings at this stage. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.
##PAGE4##4
6. On perusal of the material, there are no specific allegations against the
petitioners. It is apparent from the
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.