THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL PETITION No.6243 OF 2021

O R D E R:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 6 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.856 of 2020 on the file of the learned XVI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Rajendranagar, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 504, 506 of IPC.

2. The brief facts of the case are:

On 18.03.2019 at 10:00 hours, a complaint has been received from Yadamani, alleging that on 17.03.2019 at about 09:00 hours all of a sudden Mr.Myadari Srinivas (Accused No.1) along with six unknown persons forcefully entered into the complainant’s flat at Rainbow Residency without prior intimation, which amounts to criminal trespassing. The unknown persons are claiming themselves that they are from Police Department and were advocates and they refused to disclose their identity. They further abused and threatened the complainant and her husband in a filthy language, without any reason. As such, the complainant was worried of the situation and was in helpless condition at that point of time, as her two other unmarried daughters residing in the same flat. Thereafter, A1 started threatening the de facto complainant for private settlement and pressurized to give divorce with huge alimony to her daughter-in- law. In the said complaint, it was further stated that the son of de facto complainant i.e. husband of daughter of A1 filed RCR with case No.1625/2018 in L.B.Nagar Court, which is in mediation and as counter blast, FIR has been filed with FIR No.669 of 2018. Their family members are completely tensed out of this situation and there is no security for them in the hands of Mr.Myadari Srinivas and daughter-in-law. Even few days before filing of the complaint, Mr.Myadari Srinivas (A1) and his associates threatened the son of the de facto complainant on 07.03.2019 in the Court premises and later on, they have been receiving the threatening calls claiming to be an M.L.A and accordingly the complaint has been held, thereafter, the crime has been registered against A1 to A6 under Sections 448, 504 and 506 of IPC.

3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 6 and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.

4. Perused the record.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners vehemently submits that there are matrimonial disputes between the petitioners and the unofficial respondent pertaining to the marriage of the un-official respondent’s son with petitioner No.1’s daughter. In this regard, a case under Section 498-A IPC is pending, and a petition for restitution of conjugal rights has also been filed and allowed by the learned trial court.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that in order to mediate and amicably settle the issues, the petitioner No.1, accompanied by some well-wishers and other accused persons, who are practicing advocates, visited the residence of the de facto complainant. The petitioners were neither strangers nor intruders. They were permitted entry into the house and had no intention of committing any offence. Hence, the allegation of criminal trespass is unsustainable in law and on facts. He further submits that except for a few interested witnesses, no independent witnesses such as the watchman of the apartment or other neutral persons have been examined by the investigating officer to support the claim of illegal entry or criminal intimidation. He further submits that the Family Court has already granted a decree for restitution of conjugal rights in favor of the petitioner. While this is the prevailing status of the matrimonial dispute, the filing of a false and motivated complainant alleging criminal conduct against the petitioners appears to be a counterblast and an act of vengeance. In view of the above, the learned counsel prays that the continuation of criminal proceedings is nothing but an abuse of process of law and se