IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10981 of 2009 Between: Dubbudu Prashanth Reddy …Petitioner AND State rep by the P.P. High Court of A.P. And another …Respondents The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10981 of 2009 ORDER: While admitting the Criminal Petition on 31.12.2009, this Court granted interim stay as prayed for in Crl.M.P.No.10724 of 2009. An application was ﬁled to vacate the interim stay. By an order dated 04.03.2010 in Crl.M.P.No.1571 of 2010, this Court, while making the interim stay granted earlier as absolute, in view of the urgency pleaded, had directed to list the matter in the list of ﬁnal hearing. Thus, the matter came up today for final hearing. Sri Pottigari Sridhar Reddy, learned counsel representing the petitioner had taken this Court through the specific grounds raised and would maintain that the second respondent, infact, is suﬀering from mental disorder and this fact was suppressed by the parents of the second respondent at the time of marriage. Learned counsel also would maintain that the parents of the second respondent are known for these type of litigations and they have started the present litigation and at any rate, no part of the cause of action arise in India and for want of territorial jurisdiction also and the proceedings under challenge are liable to be quashed. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would maintain that on a careful reading of the allegations, those being factual controversies, this Court cannot go into those allegations at this stage, especially while dealing with petitions filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Sri A.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel representing second respondent would maintain that O.P.No.181 of 2009 is still pending disposal before the Judge, Family Court – cum – III Additional District Judge at Warangal and in the light of the clear allegations made in the complaint and in the FIR in Crime No.330 of 2009 of Matwada Police Station, Warangal, it is not a ﬁt matter to be interfered with by this Court. Heard the counsel on record. The second respondent gave a complaint before the Matwada Police Station, Warangal against the petitioner herein and his family members. The police have registered the said complaint as Crime No.330 of 2009 for the oﬀences punishable under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The allegations made by the second respondent herein in the said Crime are as hereunder. “I, the undersigned, is the wife of Dubbudu Prasanth Reddy, S/o. Narasimha reddy, R/o.U.S.A., presently residing at Uppal, Hyderabad and a native of Dhoolmitta of Warangal District. My parents had performed my marriage with D.Prasanth Reddy on 27.02.2009 at M.T.R.Gardens, Bheemaram by paying an amount of Rs.30,00,000/- towards dowry, gold ornaments and other house hold articles. Soon after marriage, I joined with my husband at USA on 16.03.2009 on my own VISA. I stayed at USA along with my husband for 15 days only and thereafter my husband, with in twenty days after our arrival to USA, summoned his parents-in-law had subjected me to lot of harassment both mentally and physically and my husband, my parents-in- law demanded me to bring additional dowry of Rs.10,00,000/-. On my information about the unbearable harassment and onslaughts of my husband and parents in law, my parents, though conceived, not considered the request and as such, immediately my parents came to USA and tried to pacify the onslaughts of my husband, but my husband and my in-laws harassed me and my parents and threatened us with dire consequences and forcibly necked me and my parents from their house highhandedly and as such, having no recourse to save our lives from their clutches, we went to our maternal uncle, who happens to be residing at USA. Thereafter also, I have made eﬀorts to continue marital life but ultimately, on 2nd July 2009, I came to India and soon after my arrival also my parents-in-law started harassing me in innumerable ways. The said harassment even driven me to commit suicide from 15th July 2009. My husband again started chatting with me and accordingly make me believe all along by chatting regularly. My husband’s sisters namely Neeraja, W/o. Purushotham Reddy, R/o. Bongir and Neelima, W/o. Venkat Reddy R/o. Jangaon along with their husbands harassed me in various ways to get rid of me from my husband. My husband, with an afterthought and in collusion with his parents go get rid of me, make me believe by stating that my husband shall come to India within short period to take me back to USA and under the said pretext, even my husband, through his father by putting him as a G.P.A. holder ﬁled divorce O.P., against me with all false allegations attributing mental ailment to me. My husband recently came to India i.e. on 14.11.2009 and started harassing me with his parents that I should give divorce to him or else he is intending to marry another and again flew to abroad. Therefore, I request to register a case against my husband and parents-in-law and his sisters and their husbands for the oﬀences of harassment for additional dowry.” Several facts have been narrated in the petition. It is stated in the petition that on the strength of the complaint speciﬁed supra, FIR No.330 of 2009 was registered against the petitioner and his family members; that they had been falsely implicated in the case; the second respondent is suﬀering from serious mental disorder of Schizophrenia and Frigidity and hence, it is highly improbable for her to lodge complaint in view of her condition; that the complaint has been thought after receipt of summons in O.P.No.181 of 2009 on the ﬁle of the Family Court – cum – III Additional District Judge, Warangal. Relevant material had been placed before this Court to show the mental disorder of the petitioner. Copies of E-mails exchanged between the parties also had been placed before this Court. This Court had carefully gone through the allegations made in the complaint. The aspect of mental disorder and other grounds raised are all factual controversies, which cannot be gone into by this Court, especially while dealing with petitions ﬁled under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed granting liberty to the petitioner urge all the grounds specified supra at appropriate stage. ____________________ P.S.NARAYANA, J March 17, 2010 Bvv