IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA Date:17.03.2026 Between:

Smt. Najmunnisa and 6 others …Petitioners/Accused Nos.3 to 9 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad, and another … Respondents

ORDER:

This criminal petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners-accused Nos.3 to 9 in CC No.9416 of 2021 on the file of IV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate cum Junior Civil Judge, Malkajgiri, Hyderabad, Medchal District, registered for the offences under Sections 494 and 498-A IPC. 2. Heard Sri N.V. Anantha Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the respondent No.1-State and Smt. J. K.

Anitha, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant got married to accused No.1 on 15.12.1996 and after the marriage, they lived together for certain years and out of the marital life, they were blessed with two children; one son aged 25 years and one daughter aged 20 years. Subsequently, the accused started harassing the de facto complainant both physically and mentally at the instigation of accused Nos.3 to 9. One year prior to lodging the complaint, accused Nos.1 to 3 picked up a quarrel with the de facto complainant and necked her out of the house along with the children. Thus, she started living at her parental place at Boduppal. It is further alleged that on 03.10.2021, the accused No.1 with the support of accused Nos.3 to 9 performed the second marriage with accused No.2 at Wakf Board, Vijayawada. Thus, the case was registered and charge sheet was filed against the accused for the offences under Sections 494 and 498 IPC.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the parties herein belong to Muslim community and that the offence of bigamy does not get attracted against the accused No.1 as he is a Muslim and that the petitioners herein, who are the family members and relatives of accused No.1, cannot be roped into such allegations, which are not maintainable. He further has submitted that all the petitioners are residing in a far off place in the state of Andhra Pradesh and that they never resided with the accused No.1 and the de facto complainant at any point of time and that they never harassed the de facto complainant and that the allegations against the petitioners are bald and not supported by any material and therefore, he prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted to pass appropriate orders in the petition.

6. Perused the record.

7. A perusal of the complaint discloses that the marriage of the de facto complainant was performed with the accused No.1 on 15.12.1996. The petitioners are the family members of accused No.1. The petitioner No.1-accused No.3 is the mother; petitioner Nos.2 to 4-accused Nos.4 to 6 and accused No.9 are the brothers; and petitioner Nos.5 and 6-accused Nos.7 and 8 are the sisters of accused No.1. It is alleged that the petitioners have instigated the husband of the de facto complainant-accused No.1 in harassing her and that they got the second marriage of accused No.1 performed with accused No.2. Thus, the petitioners are facing allegations under Sections 494 and 498-A IPC. The said Sections are extracted hereunder for the sake of reference:

“494. Marrying again during lifetime of husband or wife.—

Whoever, having a husband or wife living, marries in any case in which such marriage is void by reason of its taking place during the life of such husband or wife, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.—

Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punishe