THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6093 OF 2007 ORDER: 1 This is a petition filed under section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.61 of 2007 on the file of the Court of the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada against the petitioners herein for the offences punishable under sections 498-A 420 r/w 34 of IPC and under sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. 2 Brief facts are that first petitioner is father of first accused, petitioners 2 and 3 are sisters of the first accused, fourth petitioner is grand mother of the first accused, fifth petitioner is the paternal uncle of the first accused and sixth petitioner is the sister of the first petitioner herein. The marriage between the first accused and the second respondent was solemnised on 21.05.2006 and though sufficient dowry was given, being not happy with the said amount, all the petitioners including the husband of the second respondent who is arrayed as first accused in the case started harassing her. Unable to bear the said harassment, she filed the said complaint before the court below and as stated supra, the same was numbered as C.C.No.61 of 2007. 3 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4 From the record it appears that on an earlier occasion the second respondent approached the Sub Inspector of Police, Krishna Lanka P.S. and gave a complaint on the basis of which a case in Cr.No.583 of 2006 was registered on 23.11.2006 against the husband i.e. first accused in the present case and also the petitioners herein and after investigation a charge sheet was filed against the first accused alone, but no charge sheet was filed against the petitioners herein and the same was numbered as C.C.No.709 of 2006. During the pendency of the said case against the first accused, as these petitioners are not shown as accused in the said case, the present case has been filed against the petitioners herein. 5 From a perusal of the charge sheet, this court is of the view that excepting omnibus and baseless allegations, there is absolutely nothing against the petitioners 2 to 6 herein are concerned. The allegations as per the said complaint given to the police and the private complaint filed before the court, the same are only against the husband i.e. first accused and her fathering- law who is the first petitioner herein only and simply because the petitioners happened to be the family members of the first accused they are roped in. To show that they are also guilty of the said offence, except stating that all the accused including the husband have harassed her, the second respondent should establish some thing more so that the court can take cognisance. When looked at, this court is thoroughly satisfied that the said allegations made against the petitioners 2 to 6 herein are omnibus and baseless. Hence this court has no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the proceedings in so far as the petitioners 2 to 6 herein are concerned are liable to be quashed. 6 Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed in part and the proceeding in C.C.No.61 of 2007 on the file of the Court of the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada are hereby quashed in so far as the petitioners 2 to 6 herein are concerned. However, as in the complaint before the police and in the private complaint filed before the court, the allegations are against the husband i.e. first accused who is facing trial in the said case and against the first petitioner herein who is the father of the first accused, the said proceedings may go on. ---------------- 17.06.2010 Kvsn