HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRL. P.NO.5559 OF 2009 DATE: 20.01.2011 BETWEEN: Rallabandi Satyanarayana and others .. Petitioners And Rallabandi Dhanalakshmi and another ` .. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRL. P.NO.5559 OF 2009 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/A2 to A6 and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State. This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the entire proceedings in Crime No.161 of 2009 of Thorrur Police Station, Warangal District. The first respondent, who is the wife of the first accused filed a complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Thorrur alleging dowry harassment and bigamous marriage between the first accused and the 7th accused Lakshmi. The learned Magistrate forwarded the complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for investigation to the Station House Officer, Thorrur Police Station. Basing on the complaint, the police registered Crime No.161 of 2009 under Sections 498A and 494 IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Now the matter is under investigation. Admittedly, the marriage between the first respondent and the first accused was performed on 19.06.1994. Even as per the allegations made in the complaint petition, both lived together happily for a period of 8 years. It was alleged that subsequently, the first accused and the petitioners started harassing the first respondent for additional dowry. The petitioner No.1/A2 is the father of A1 and he is aged about 72 years. The petitioner No.2/A3 is the mother of A1 and she is aged about 65 years. The petitioners 3 to 5 are the brothers of A1 and they have been staying in Hyderabad since several years. It is their contention that even on the date of marriage of the first respondent, they were living separately and they have nothing to do with the disputes between the first respondent and A1. Perusal of the complaint petition at best reveals the commission of offence by A1 and A7 and only some sweeping allegations have been made against the petitioners/A2 to 6 and ex facie they appear to be false. It is obvious from the way in which the petitioners/A2 to A6 have been implicated that it was by resorting to misuse of provisions under Sections 498-A and 494 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Under the circumstances mentioned above, if the investigation is allowed to continue against the petitioners/A2 to A6, it will result in miscarriage of justice and causes much inconvenience and hardship to them. Therefore, the entire investigation in Crime No.161 of 2009 of Thorrur Police Station, Warangal District is quashed against the petitioners/A2 to A6 and the criminal petition is allowed. _______________ R.KANTHA RAO,J Date: 20.01.2011 Kvrm HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRL. P.NO.5559 OF 2009 DATE: 20.01.2011