IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO : 1457 of 2010 Between: 1 Mohd Osman, S/o. Mohammed Khan, R/o. H.No. 12-2-324/4, Murad Nagar, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad 2 Mohd Lateefuddin, D/o. Mohammed Ghousuddin, R/o. H.No. 12-2-324/4, Murad Nagar, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad 3 Mrs. Shabana Begum, W/o. Mohd Lateefuddin, R/o. H.No. 12-2-324/4, Murad Nagar, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The State of A.P.,rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P.,Hyderabad 2 Smt .Ateequnnisa Begum, W/o. Mohd Aleemuddin, R/o. H.No. 9-4-136181, Quli Qutub Shah, Jamali Kunta, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Section ____ of Crl.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed therewith, the High Court will be pleased toto quash the proceedings against the petitioners /Accused No.4 to 6 in CC.No. 201 of 2008 on the file of Hon'ble XIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad The Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.SUDHAKARA RAO, Advocate for the Petitioner and of the Public Prosecutor, on behalf of the Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER PSR, J. Crl.P.No. 1457 of 2010 O r d e r: The de facto complainant, the second respondent herein, and the petitioners are present. The de facto complainant filed her House hold card bearing No.WAP1675512A0076 in proof of her identity. She reports that she is not pressing the complaint against the petitioners and the proceedings against them may be quashed. 2. Considering the circumstances, as the petitioners are not the main accused, in this case under the Dowry Prohibition Act and as the main accused are absconding, as submitted by the petitioners, the proceedings against the present petitioners (A-4 to A-6) in C.C.No. 201 of 2008 on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad are quashed. 3. Accordingly the petition is allowed to the extent indicated, insofar as it relates to the present petitioners only. _______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J. February 22, 2010. *BVS