THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2588 of 2008 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash C.C.No.273 of 2005 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Gudur, Nellore District, against the petitioners registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 494 IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that in the order, dated 08.03.2007, passed by the IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore, in M.C.No.1 of 2005, it was categorically held that the second respondent is not the legally wedded wife of the first petitioner as it was established by evidence that the earlier marriage of the first petitioner with another lady was subsisting and hence, the present CC is not maintainable at all. 3. The powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked by this Court ordinarily when there is an abuse of process of the Court or to secure the ends of justice or to carry out the orders passed under the Code. The allegations made, if taken as true and correct, at this stage made out a prima facie case for the offences alleged against the petitioners, then the question of quashing a complaint does not arise. 4. To attract the offence under Section 498-A IPC certain ingredients are required to be satisfied. Section 498-A IPC reads as under: “Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjection her to cruelty – Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.” Further, any willful conduct of the husband which is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health of the woman; and the harassment of the woman with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security comes within the meaning of “cruelty”, as per the Explanation to Section 498-A IPC. 5. It is to be noted that this Court disposed of Criminal Petition No.1168 of 2005 by its order, dated 11.07.2005, leaving it open to the petitioners to seek discharge from the charge of bigamy by filing an application before the Court below. Admittedly, the trial in the said Criminal case is not yet commenced. In view of the said observation, the aforesaid contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners cannot be sustained. 6. The allegations in the charge sheet would go to show that the marriage of the second respondent with the first petitioner was performed at Srirama Temple, Pedakakani of Guntur District on 13.02.1997, according to Hindu rites and customs; that the relatives and other elders attended the marriage; that after the marriage, the couple lived happily for about nine months; that thereafter, the second respondent begot a male child on 30.10.1997 out of the lawful wedlock and as it was a pre-mature birth, the child was unhealthy; that when the second respondent went to her in-laws house at Sullurpeta, the petitioners did not allow her on the pretext that the child is unhealthy and demanded her to bring Rs.4,00,000/- towards dowry. 7. At this stage, the allegations in the charge sheet cannot be tested as true and correct. If the uncontroverted allegations make out an offence under Section 498-A IPC, the question of quashing the complaint does not arise. If the said allegation is accepted as true, it is an unlawful demand, which is a cruelty within the meaning of Section 498-A IPC. 8. The questions as to whether the second respondent is the legally wedded wife of the first petitioner or not?, whether the earlier marriage of the first petitioner with one P.Sujatha said to be solemnized on 12.05.1993, was subsisting as on the date of the marriage of the first petitioner with the second respondent on 13.02.1997 or not?, are the questions of fact, which have to be decided and determined by the competent criminal Court, after trial of the case and certainly, not by this Court exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Therefore, as a prima facie case is made out against the petitioners, the question of quashing the said C.C. does not arise and the Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 9. Since the said C.C. is of the year 2005, the trial Court shall dispose of the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10. With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _____________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 23rd July, 2010 dr