THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR Criminal Petition No. 4560 of 2009 Order: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners/A2 to A4 seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.140 of 2009 of Chandanagar Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Hyderabad. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. The second respondent herein is the daughter-in-law of petitioners 1 and 2 herein and the third petitioner herein is the daughter of petitioners 1 and 2. Based on the complaint given by the second respondent herein the police registered the case in Crime No.140 of 2009 of Chandanagar Police Station under Sections 498-A IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. As seen from the allegations made by the second respondent in her complaint, her brief case is that her marriage with Kada Venkata Narayana Suresh, the son of petitioners 1 and 2, was performed on 16.03.2006 and since then she started residing in her in-laws house in Flat No.203, Badruka Apartments, Lane No.9, Brahmanwadi, Begumpet and that they lived happily for few months and that subsequently the petitioners and her husband harassed her demanding her to bring additional dowry. It is also her allegation that the petitioners and her husband had poured boiled liquid on her and they confined her in the house and did not allow her to go out. After two years thereafter when she went to her parents house she was taken to the hospital. Her specific allegation is that her husband demanded Rs.10,00,000/-. During the course of investigation A1 was arrested and he was remanded to judicial custody. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners/A2 to A4 is that the petitioners have settled at Puttaparthi and they have constructed a house at Puttaparthi and that the letter written by the mother of the second respondent/de facto complainant herself shows that the petitioners have been residing at Puttaparthi and that they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is settled law that the documents filed by the petitioners/accused cannot be considered at this stage. It cannot be said that the allegations made in the FIR or in the remand report on the face of it do not prima facie make out a case against the petitioners. The petitioners may take the defence of alibi or adduce evidence at appropriate stage. Therefore, it is clear that there are no grounds to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/A2 to A4. However, having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners/A2 to A4 that the petitioners have settled at Puttaparthi and that they were not residing along with A1, the Investigating Officers are hereby directed to enquire into these matters and to verify whether the petitioners/A2 to A4 were residing at Puttaparthi and do fair investigation into the matter. The police concerned are directed not to arrest the petitioners/A2 to A4 till the date of filing of charge sheet, if at all they finally come to a conclusion that a charge sheet has to be filed against the petitioners/A2 to A4. With the above observations, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. ______________________ B. CHANDRA KUMAR, J. Date: 29.09.2011 Nsr