THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.6323 of 2025

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.154 of 2023 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Nakrekal, Nalgonda District, registered for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the de-facto complainant lodged a report on 03.03.2023 stating that on 11.02.2022, her parents performed her marriage with petitioner No.1. At the time of marriage, her parents gave Rs.20,00,000/-, 40 tholas of gold ornaments, and 2 acres of land to the petitioners’ family as dowry. After the marriage, she joined the company of petitioner No.1 at her in-laws’ residence. The marriage was arranged under the representation that petitioner No.1 was employed as a software professional in the U.S.A.; however, he was actually a mental health patient residing at home without any employment. The petitioners allegedly harassed her both physically and mentally, demanding additional dowry.

3. Basing on the same, the Police registered the case in Crime No.51 of 2023 for the offences punishable under 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and they filed the charge sheet, vide C.C.No.154 of 2023 before the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Nakrekal, Nalgonda District.

4. Heard Sri M.Achuta Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Rudresh Deshpande, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1 – State. Though notice served upon respondent No.2, none appeared on her behalf.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 had filed a divorce petition vide F.C.O.P.No.249 of 2023, wherein both parties mutually entered into a settlement and filed the same before the Family Court. The Family Court duly recorded the settlement and granted a decree of divorce. He further submitted that as per Paragraph No.8 of the said settlement, respondent No.2 had lodged a present criminal complaint against petitioner No.1 and his parents. In light of the total monetary settlement and grant of divorce, respondent No.2 had agreed to withdraw the said criminal case and compound the matter. He further submitted that despite the said undertaking and mutual settlement, respondent No.2 has failed to withdraw or compound the criminal proceedings. Therefore, prayed this Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the settlement entered into between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 contains a specific clause pertaining to the withdrawal of the criminal case. The said terms have been duly recorded in the F.C.O.P. proceedings and prayed the Court to pass appropriate orders.

7. In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon a perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 had mutually entered into a settlement, which was duly recorded in F.C.O.P. No.249 of 2023, culminating in a decree of divorce. As per the terms of settlement set out in Paragraph No.8 of the said order, respondent No.2 had agreed to withdraw the criminal proceedings initiated against petitioner No.1 and his parents.

8. It is also seen from the judgment in F.C.O.P. No.249 of 2023 that petitioner No.1 had paid a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- to respondent No.2 towards permanent alimony. However, despite the settlement, respondent No.2 has not withdrawn the criminal proceedings, as agreed.

9. In view of the above facts, the continuation of criminal proceedings against petitioner No.1 is nothing but an abuse of the process of law. Furthermore, as seen from the complaint, no specific allegations have been made against petitioner Nos.2 and 3. Therefore, continuation o