IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2005 OF 2020 DATE: 18-02-2026 Between:

Syed Parvez Sohail … Petitioner And State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad and another ... Respondents

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 seeking to quash the proceedings against him in Crime No.662 of 2019 of Women Police Station, DD, Hyderabad, registered for the offences under Sections 498A I.P.C. and Sections 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. Heard Sri Mohammad Khiyar Pasha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there are no allegations in the complaint to point out the offence under Section

498A I.P.C. against the petitioner herein. He further submitted that the daughter of respondent No.2-de facto complainant has already lodged complaints at UK alleging assault and rape and the same were dismissed. He further submitted that now the present complaint is lodged by the father of the alleged victim alleging impotency against the petitioner herein. Therefore, the present complaint is based on false allegations. Hence, continuation of the proceedings in the present crime against the petitioner is an abuse of process of law. He, therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings in the present crime against the petitioner herein.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there are specific allegations against the petitioner and that the investigation is not yet completed, as there was stay of the proceedings. He, therefore, prayed to vacate the stay.

5. Perused the record.

6. In the complaint, it is alleged that after one month of marriage, the petitioner and his parents have started quarrelling with the daughter of respondent No.2-de facto complainant (alleged victim) on petty issues, harassed her and beat her black and blue. It is further alleged that the de facto complainant was shocked to know that the petitioner is an impotent; that his earlier marriage was dissolved due to impotency; and that the same was concealed at the time of marriage of his daughter. It is further alleged that after marriage, his daughter resided at Kadapa with her in-laws and her in-laws started quarrelling with her; that thereafter, his daughter and the petitioner went to London and even there, the quarrels continued on petty issues; that unbearable with the said harassment, his daughter has given complaints to London police and they conducted a family counselling and suggested his daughter to live separately from the petitioner; and that his daughter and the petitioner are living separately from nine months. As seen from the record, the investigation is stalled in this case at the threshold. In order to ascertain the truth in the allegations, investigation has to go on.

7. Hence, the Criminal Petition is disposed of with a direction to the police concerned to complete the investigation strictly in accordance with law.

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________________ JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA Date: 18.02.2026.

MD