THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.649 of 2024

O R D E R

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners-

accused Nos. 5 and 6 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.4610 of 2023 on the file of XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under section 498-A, 406, 506 of IPC and Section 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act (for short ‘The Act’).

2. Heard Mr.Mohd. Hassan, learned counsel for the petitioners-accused Nos.5 and 6, Mr.Ali Faraz Farooqui, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Perused the record.

3. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that accused Nos. 5 and 6 are wife and husband, wherein accused No.5 is sister in law and accused No.6 is brother of the husband of respondent No.2. The marriage of the respondent No.2 with the brother of the petitioner No.6 was performed on 17.05.2021 as per their caste customs. After marriage her husband harassed her physically and on 11.12.2022 her husband and in laws started beating her stating that they want to kill her. Upon instigation of the petitioners, husband of respondent No.2 snatched her entire gold ornaments and other items and beat her and harassed her mentally and physically threatening her with dire consequences threatening her and forcing her to take divorce. Hence, the respondent No.2 filed the present case for the offences under Section 498-A, 406, 506 of IPC and Section 6 of the Act.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there are no specific allegations against the petitioners- accused Nos.5 and 6 who are sister in law and brother of husband of respondent No.2. It is submitted that accused Nos.5 and 6 left to United Kingdom for the purpose of further studies and they have been living their own life in United Kingdom, as such, the question of residing with accused No.1 and respondent No.2 as mentioned in charge sheet are absolutely false. Only omnibus and vague allegations are made against the petitioners being the brother and sister in law of husband of respondent No.2 and the petitioners were roped in a false case.

5. While seeking to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioners, learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon a decision in Dara Lakshmi Narayana and others v. State of Telangana and another, AIR 2025 SUPREME COURT 173 wherein the Honourable Supreme Court of India held as under:

25. A mere reference to the names of family members in a criminal case arising out of a matrimonial dispute, without specific allegations indicating their active involvement should be nipped in the bud. It is a well-recognised fact, borne out of judicial experience, that there is often a tendency to implicate all the members of the husband's family when domestic disputes arise out of a matrimonial discord. Such generalised and sweeping accusations unsupported by concrete evidence or particularised allegations cannot form the basis for criminal prosecution. Courts must exercise caution in such cases to prevent misuse of legal provisions and the legal process and avoid unnecessary harassment of innocent family members. In the present case, appellant Nos.2 to 6, who are the members of the family of appellant No.1 have been Iiving in different cities and have not resided in the matrimonial house of appellant No.1 and respondent No 2 herein. Hence, they cannot be dragged into

criminal prosecution and the same would be an abuse of the process of the law in the absence of specific allegations made against each of them.

28. The inclusion of Section 498A of the IPC by way of an amendment was intended to curb cruelty inflicted on a woman by her husband and his family, ensuring swift intervention by the State. However, in recent years, as there have been a notable rise in matrimonial disputes across the country, accompanied by growing discord and tension within the institution of marri