THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.9611 of 2022

O R D E R

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 4 seeking to quash the criminal proceedings against them in C.C.No.6100 of 2020 on the file of the learned V Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 498-A, 417, 406, 506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and Sections

3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act (for short ‘the Act’).

02. Heard Sri H.Venugopal, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri S.Amarender Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 4, Sri Molepeddi Srinivas Reddy, learned counsel for Respondent No.2 and Smt.S.Madhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State-respondent No.1. Perused the record.

03(a). In brief, the case of the prosecution is that the marriage between accused No.1 and the victim was solemnized on 16.03.2017. After the marriage, the victim joined the matrimonial home at Hastinapuram to lead a conjugal life. On 26.03.2017, both the victim and accused No.1 traveled to the United States of America (USA). Initially, they lived happily for about a week and thereafter, accused No.1 allegedly began harassing the victim, demanding that the plots given to her at the time of marriage be registered in his name. He also demanded additional dowry, allegedly at the instigation of accused Nos.2 to 4.

03(b). It is further alleged that accused No.1 failed to maintain physical relations with the victim and threatened to kill her if she disclosed this fact to anyone. In February 2019, accused No.1 is said to have taken an amount of Rs.15 Lakhs from the victim and purchased a plot in Hyderabad in the name of accused No.4. In April 2019, when the victim informed accused Nos.2 to 4 about the lack of physical intimacy from accused No.1, a panchayat was convened. During this meeting, accused Nos.1 to 4 reportedly assured her that she would be treated well.

03(c). Subsequently, the victim and accused No.1 returned to the USA. However, accused No.1 allegedly bore grudge against the victim for having revealed the matter to the elders and threatened to divorce her. On 23.01.2020, accused No.1 asked the victim to return to India, stating that the issue would be resolved in the presence of elders. Believing him, the victim returned to India on the said date. However, accused No.1 did not respond to her calls and messages thereafter. When she contacted accused Nos.2 to 4, they too allegedly demanded additional dowry.

03(d). On 06.03.2020, the victim went back to the USA. After completing a two-week quarantine due to the COVID-19 pandemic, she reached their residence, only to find that accused No.1 had vacated the premises without informing her. It is alleged that he took away all her documents and 15 tulas of gold ornaments from the house. The victim lodged a complaint with the Cambridge Police Department on 25.03.2020. When the US police contacted accused No.1, he allegedly refused to provide the documents required for the victim’s visa renewal and expressed disinterest in continuing the marital relationship. Finally, in June 2020, a mediation session took place at Nalgonda in the presence of elders, during which accused No.1 refused to resume conjugal relations with the victim. Aggrieved by the harassment, respondent No.2 who is the father of the victim lodged the present complaint, alleging offences under Sections 498-A, 417, 406, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

04. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 4 have no involvement whatsoever in the alleged offences and have never subjected the victim to any form of harassment. It is submitted that the petitioner-accused No.2 is the mother, petitioner-accused No.3 is the brother and petitioner-accused No.4 is the sister of the accused No.1. They never interfer