HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA Crl.P.Nos.4881 & 5489 of 2007 Date : 3-3-2010 Crl.P.Nos.4881/2007 Between : Mediga Durga Ramesh Kumar @ Raja s/o. Satyanarayana .. Petitioner And Depuri Rama Devi w/o.Ramachandraiah and another .. Respondents Crl.P.No.5489 of 2007 Medida Ananda Prasad @ Baji Naidu s/o.Satyanarayana .. Petitioner and Depuri Rama Devi w/o.Ramachandraiah and another .. Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA Crl.P.Nos.4881 & 5489 of 2007 COMMON ORDER: 1. Heard Sri T.Pradyumna Kumar Reddy, , the learned Counsel representing the petitioner in both these Criminal Petitions and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the 2nd respondent. 2. Crl.P.No.4881/2007 is filed to quash the order taking cognizance in D.D.R. 620/99 and P.RC.No.40/2007 on the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam relating the petitioner/A-1. Likewise, Crl.P.No.5489/2007 is filed by A-2 in P.R.C.No.40/2007 on the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam wherein the case was taken on file as against the petitioner/A-2 for an alleged offence under Section 506 IPC. In view of the commonality of the questions of fact and questions of law involved, both these Criminal Petitions are being disposed of by a Common Order. 3. The petitioners/A-1 and A-2 in both these Criminal Petitions are brothers and A-2 is a practising Advocate. The daughter of the 1st respondent had fallen in love with the petitioner/A-1 in Crl.P.No.4881/2007 and subsequent thereto the elders decided to celebrate the marriage of Adilakshmi i.e., the daughter of the 1st respondent and celebrated betrothal on 20-2-1999. The daughter of the 1st respondent consumed poison and while undergoing treatment at K.G.H. Hospital, died. It is also stated that the 1st respondent alleged to have given complaint on 28-3-1989 to S.I. of Police, Gopalapatnam but no action was taken and aggrieved by the same she filed a complaint before the Human Rights Commission and the same was numbered as D.D.R.No.620/99 dated 15-4- 1999 and forwarded under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to Police Station, Pendurthi, registered as Cr.No.49/99 dated 25-4-1999 and the same was investigated into and a final report was submitted on 28-6-1999 stating that it is a case of suicidal death by poisoning. It is further stated that earlier it was registered as Cr.No.31/99 under Section 174 Cr.P.C. for the death of the deceased and the Inspector of Police, Law & Order, Circle VI, Harbour, Visakhapatnam took up investigation and referred the case as one of suicidal death by poisoning. 4. It is further stated that on 17-2-2000 a fresh complaint was filed against A-1 and A-2 and the S.I. of Police Y.Govinda Rao and the same was taken on file and numbered as P.R.C.No.4/2000 under Section 306 IPC r/w. Section 201 Cr.P.C. It is also further stated that A-2 filed Crl.P.No.4304/2002 before this Court seeking quashing cognizance order dated 29-2-2000 and this Court was pleased to set-aside the same by order dated 12-8-2002. Further it is stated that A-1 also filed Crl.P.No.2641/2002 seeking to quash the proceedings against him also and this Court was pleased to pass the following order : “Since in Crl.P.No.4304/2000 filed by A-2, a learned single Judge of this Court set-aside the order dated 29- 2-2000 taking cognizance of the offence, the matter is at large before the learned Magistrate. Therefore, the learned Magistrate shall take into consideration the report received from the Police as well as the sworn statement recorded by him and the complaint and pass appropriate orders as directed in Crl.P.No.4304/2000 in respect of the petitioner also”. The learned Magistrate in full compliance of the order of this Court took cognizance by his order 2-12-2002 only against A- 2 under Section 506(II) IPC and dropped A-1 and A-3 as there is no offence made out against them. 5. Further it is stated that the 1st respondent herein had assailed the order dated 2-12-2002 in P.R.C.No.4/2000 by way of filing Crl.P.No.2064/2003 on the ground that the Counsel for the petitioner/accused appeared at pre- cognizance stage before the Magistrate and therefore requested to set-aside the order and to direct the Magistrate to frame charge under Section 302/306 IPC. It is further stated that this Court was pleased to dispose of on 21-4-2006 observing that the accused were actively represented by an Advocate which would amount to active participation beyond the permissible limits at the pre-cognizance stage and impermissible impugned order cannot be sustained and accordingly quashed the same and the matter had been remitted back to the learned Magistrate to consider the case afresh in accordance with law. It is also stated that the matter came upto to D.D.R. stage again and on 23-7-2007 the matter came up before the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam in which the learned Magistrate framed charges under Section 306 IPC r/w. Section 201 against A-1 and under Section 506 against A-2 and the case is numbered as P.R.C.No.40/2007 and posted to 23-8-2007. In such circumstances, these Criminal Petitions are filed praying for quashing of the proceedings aforesaid. 6. Several grounds also had been raised and several decisions also had been specified in the grounds – T.V. Sarma Vs. R.Meeriah [1], State of U.P. Vs. R.K. Srivastava [2], P.Ram Murthy Vs. S.H.O., Dhone [3], A.Venkat Reddy and others Vs. Ukanti Janardhan Reddy and another[4]. 7. In Crl.P.No.5489/2007, the allegations in the complaint had been specified as hereunder : The deceased Adilakshmi was doing her B.Com. She fell in love with A-1. A-1 was running a private Gymnasium. On 20-2-1999 the Betrothal ceremony of A-1 and Adilakshmi was performed. On 22-3-1999 the 1st respondent was about to go to her office when the deceased Adilakshmi informed that she was going to jewellery shop along with A-1. At about 12.00 noon A-1 brought Adilakshmi and made her to sit on the steps and informed the 1st respondent that the deceased Adilakshmi consumed poison at the Gym. Immediately she was shifted to K.G. Hospital where Dr.N.Prasada Rao, Casualty Medical Officer examined her and admitted the deceased in the Casualty Ward. While undergoing treatment the deceased died. On 22-3-1999 at about 5.30 p.m. the petitioner/A-2 obtained some signatures of the 1st respondent at the entrance of Pendurthi P.S. The police registered a crime in Cr.No.31/1999 under Section 174 Cr.P.C. After investigation, the police referred the case as suicidal death by poisoning. On 15-4-1999 the 1st respondent filed a complaint before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-Special Judge for Cases of Human Rights Act, Visakhapatnam. The case was referred to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for investigation. The police registered the same as Cr.No.49/1999 of Pendurthi P.S. The police investigated into Cr.No.49/99 and filed a final report as suicidal death. Thereafter, a complaint was filed by the 1st respondent before the VII Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam which was taken on file as P.R.C.No.4/2000 for alleged offences punishable under Section 306 r/w. Section 201 IPC against A- 1 and A-2. Against the said order, the petitioner/A-2 filed Crl.P.No.4304/2000 before this Court and by order dated 12-8- 2002 this Court was pleased to allow the petition and the order of taking cognizance on 29-2-2000 had been set-aside. The learned Magistrate was directed to taken into consideration the report received from the police as well as the sworn statements recorded by the Court and the contents of the complaint and pass an elaborate order with reasons and shall bestow special attention while considering the same as to what offence, if any there constitute. Thereafter, A-1 filed Crl.P.No.264/2002 to quash the proceedings in P.R.C.No.4/2000 on the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. By order dated 22-10-2002 this Court disposed of the petition directing the learned Magistrate to pass appropriate orders as directed in Crl.P.No.4304/2000 dated 12-8-2002 in respect of the petitioner. Basing on the observations of this Court the learned Magistrate considered the matter afresh and took cognizance of the offence under Section 506 Part-II IPC against the petitioner/A-2 only and the same was numbered as C.C.No.397/2002 on the file of VII Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam against which the 1st respondent filed Crl.P.No.2064/2003 before this Court seeking directions to the learned Magistrate to take cognizance under Section 302 & 306 IPC against A-1 to A-3. By its order dated 21-4-2006 this Court was pleased to quash all further proceedings in P.R.C.No.4/2000 and directed the learned Magistrate to reconsider the matter and take cognizance afresh according to law. Then after several adjournments on 23-3-2007 the learned Magistrate took cognizance under Section 306 r/w. 201 IPC against A-1 and under Section 506 IPC against A-2 and renumbered it as P.R.C.No.40/2007 on the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam and issued summons to A-1 and A-2. 8. The ingredients of Section 306 IPC r/w. Section 201 IPC and the ingredients of Section 506 IPC need not be discussed in elaboration. On a careful analysis of the facts, absolutely there is no material to show at least some prima facie material why and under what circumstances the deceased consumed poison. The conduct of the petitioner/A- 1 in Crl.P.No.4881/2007 also to be taken into consideration. Even to take cognizance of the offence under Section 506 IPC as against the petitioner/A-2 in Crl.P.No.5489/2007, absolutely there is no acceptable evidence and the son of the 1st respondent had not been examined at all. In the light of the same, to further proceed with the prosecution, in the considered opinion of this Court, would not serve any purpose whatsoever. In the light of the same and also in the light of the prior police reports, the proceedings are hereby quashed. 9. The Criminal Petitions are accordingly allowed. _________________ Justice P.S.Narayana Date : 3-3-2010 AM [1] AIR 1980 A.P. 219 [2] 1989(4) SCC 59 [3] 2000(6) ALT 633 [4] 2003(1) ALT (Crl) 326