HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5010 OF 2008 DATE:23.07.2010 Between: Koneti Viswanatham and 4 others …… Petitioners. And: Chenji Nagamma @ Revathi and another …..Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5010 OF 2008 ORDER: 1. The petitioners 1 to 5/A-1 to A-5 are accused of offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in C.C.No.69 of 2008 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Koduru, Kadapa District. A-1 is husband of the 1strespondent/defacto-comploainant. A-2 to A-4 are sisters of A-1. A-5 is son of A-4. 2. It is contended by the petitioners’ counsel that A-1 filed H.M.O.P.No.2 of 2008 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nellore under Section 13(1)(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act against the 1st respondent and as a counter blast for the same, the 1st respondent gave report to the police thereafter. It is further contended that as on today decree of divorce was granted between A-1 and the 1st respondent and therefore, the 1st respondent cannot maintain the criminal case against the petitioners as she ceased to be wife of A-1. Whether the divorce is subsequent to or prior to launching of criminal case for the offence under Section 498-A IPC, it cannot have any bearing on the offence committed prior to divorce. By virtue of the divorce, all the previous alleged criminal activity cannot come to a naught. 3. It is contended by the petitioners’ counsel that main grievance of the 1st respondent is with regard to sale of property by the husband and that it cannot be basis for prosecution in this case. Apart from her grievance for sale of the property at the instance of his sisters, the 1st respondent categorically alleged that A-1 was demanding for additional dowry from her on the ground that he is an employed person, and that A- 1 was harassing her and attributing illegal intimacy with others. It is further alleged that A-2 to A-5 were also harassing the 1st respondent and threatened her with pouring of kerosene on her and setting fire to her in case she did not leave their house. All the facts cumulatively constitute the offences and more particularly relating to Sections 498-A and 506 IPC against all the petitioners. Truth or falsity of the said allegations is a matter of decision by the trial court after trial then both the parties will be leading evidence in support of their contentions. I do not find any reasons to quash the proceedings in the lower court. 4. In the result, the criminal petition is dismissed. __________________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU,J. Date:23.07.2010. Gk. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5010 OF 2008 Date:23.07.2010 Gk.