THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.361 of 2022

O R D E R :

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 7 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.8712 of 2021 on the file of the V Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B. Nagar, pertaining to Crime No.313 of 2021 of W.P.S. Saroornagar, registered for the offences under Sections 498-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’).

2. Heard Ms. Seema Yasmeen, learned counsel representing Mr. C.Vikram Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mrs. S.Madhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. No representation on behalf of respondent No.2.

Perused the record.

3. The petitioner-accused No.1 is the husband of de facto complainant. The petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 5 are the parents and married sisters of petitioner-accused No.1. The petitioners-accused Nos.6 and 7 are the husbands of petitioners-accused Nos.4 and 5.

4. The gist of the complaint is that the marriage of petitioner-accused No.1 was performed with the 2^nd respondent-de facto complainant on 27.04.2018. At the time of marriage, certain amount of dowry was given. They lived happily for some days. Thereafter, the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 7 harassed the de facto complainant physically and mentally demanding additional dowry and they threatened to perform another marriage of the petitioner-accused No.1, if she will not bring additional dowry. On 14.06.2020, some unknown persons entered the house of de facto complainant, made a galata and warned that they will kill her and her parents, if she does not sign divorce papers.

5. It is contended by the learned counsel for petitioners that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the case by the de facto complainant, only to wreck vengeance in view of the matrimonial disputes between the de facto complainant and petitioner- accused No.1. It is contended that the petitioners-accused Nos.4 to 7 are staying away from the de facto complainant and petitioner-accused No.1, therefore, there was no occasion or necessity for them to harass the de facto complainant. It is further contended that the marriage of petitioner-accused No.1 with de facto complainant had happened on 27.04.2018; the alleged incident of threatening had occurred on 14.06.2020, however, the present complaint was lodged on 30.07.2021. The reason for such inordinate delay in lodging the complaint remained unexplained. It is further contended that as per the complaint, it is stated that on 14.06.2020, some unknown persons have threatened to kill the de facto complainant and her parents, if she does not sign divorce papers. However, the said persons were not identified during the course of investigation by the Police. It is also contended that except bald allegations, no specific overt acts are attributed to the petitioners herein.

Thus, he prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

6. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor contended that all the accused, including the petitioners herein, have harassed the de facto complainant after her marriage with petitioner- accused No.1 and being unable to bear the same, the present complaint has been lodged. It is further 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, she prayed to dismiss the petition.

7. For the sake of convenience, Section 498-A of IPC is extracted hereunder:

498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.—

Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall als