THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.11111 of 2024

O R D E R

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.2 to quash the proceedings against her in C.C.No.3364 of 2024 on the file of the learned III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rangareddy District at LB Nagar. The offences alleged against the petitioner-accused No.2 are under Sections 498- A of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act (for short ‘the Act’).

02. Heard Sri Veera Babu Gandu, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.2 and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State- respondent No.1 as well as Ms. R. Sandhya, learned counsel representing Sri Nageswar Rao Pujari, learned counsel for the unofficial respondent No.2. Perused the record.

03. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that the marriage between the accused No.1 and the respondent No.2 was solemnized on 06.06.2023 before the Registrar and was subsequently celebrated in a traditional manner on 18.11.2023. Thereafter, the accused No.1 left for the United Kingdom with an assurance to the respondent No.2 that he would take her along him after securing a spouse visa. It is alleged that the accused No.1 subjected the respondent No.2 to both physical and mental cruelty by suspecting her character. It is further alleged that he obtained a sum of Rs.72,000/- from the respondent No.2 and coerced her into signing divorce papers. It is also the allegation of the prosecution that the accused No.1 retained her gold ornaments, silver articles, and valuable gifts. Aggrieved by the alleged acts of cruelty and continuous harassment, the respondent No.2 lodged the present complaint against the accused Nos.1 to 5.

04. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner-accused No.2 has no involvement whatsoever in the alleged offences and has never subjected the respondent No.2 to any form of harassment. It is submitted that the petitioner–accused No.2, who is aged more than 63 years and is the mother of the accused No.1, has not interfered in the matrimonial affairs between the respondent No.2 and the accused No.1. It is further submitted that the petitioner–accused No.2 has neither demanded dowry from the respondent No.2 nor from her parents at any point of time. Learned counsel would contend that there are no specific or direct allegations against the petitioner–accused No.2 either in the complaint or in the charge sheet, and the contents thereof do not disclose the essential ingredients necessary to constitute the offences punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Act. It is also submitted that this Court, by order dated 11.12.2025 passed in Criminal Petition No.11154 of 2024, has already quashed the proceedings against the accused Nos.3 to 5, and therefore, on the same footing, the criminal proceedings against the petitioner–accused No.2 are also liable to be quashed.

05. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-respondent No.1 as well as the learned counsel for the unofficial respondent No.2 submitted that there are specific allegations against the petitioner and the truth or otherwise would come out only after conducting trial by the concerned Court and prayed to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

06. A perusal of the entire record reveals that after the marriage, the respondent No.2 and the accused No.1 was performed twice i.e. on 06.06.2023 in the Registrar Office and traditionally on 18.11.2023. It is evident from the face of the record that the majority of the allegations are directed against the accused No.1, the husband of respondent No.2. The present petitioner, who is arrayed as the accused No.2, is the mother-in-law of the respondent No.2 and is aged approximately more than 63 years.

07. Significantly, there are no specific or distinct allegations in the entire charge sheet detailing the