HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA CRL.P.No.11019 of 2009 ORDER: This criminal petition is filed for quashing of the proceedings initiated against the petitioner-A2 in C.C.No.482 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the XIII- Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 498-A, 506 read with Section 109 of I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Brief facts of the case are that the 2nd respondent married accused No.1 about seven years back and they were blessed with one daughter aged about four years and that A-1 is having relationship with the petitioner-A2, who is his colleague, and they both used to move freely. When the 2nd respondent questioned about the said issue, A-1 started creating troubles to 2nd respondent even for petty matters and manhandled her and also started harassing her to bring more dowry and also forced her to give divorce otherwise he would kill her. It is further stated that A-2 also abused the 2nd respondent in filthy language and threatened her with dire consequences. Owing to the said harassment by her husband, the 2nd respondent left the house and staying with her mother. It is further stated that in the absence of the 2nd respondent, A-1 brought the petitioner-A2 to his house and when they both were in the house, 2nd respondent bolted the main door from outside and informed the same to the police. The 2nd respondent lodged a complaint before the police, on 04.10.2008, basing on which a case in Crime No.303 of 2008 was registered under Sections 448, 498-A, 506 read with Section 109 of I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act against the accused and after completion of investigation the police filed a charge sheet against the accused and the same was numbered as C.C.No.482 of 2008. The main contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner-A2 is in no way related to the husband of the 2nd respondent-complainant, who is arrayed as Accused No.1. He further contended that the allegations levelled in the complaint by the 2nd respondent herein are vague and therefore, the proceedings initiated against the petitioner-A2 are liable to be quashed. In the light of the aforesaid submissions, this Court looked into the allegations levelled in the charge sheet. The marriage between the 2nd respondent-complainant and one Surendranath (Accused No.1) was performed on 13.12.2003 and they both lived happily for a period of about four years. However, because of various reasons they both agreed to get the marriage dissolved and accordingly the 2nd respondent herein filed O.P.No.1140 of 2008 before the Additional Family Court, Hyderabad and the learned Judge, after considering the entire evidence available on record, while allowing the said O.P. dissolved the marriage of the 2nd respondent herein with her husband (A-1) by granting decree of divorce. Further, as per the allegations of the charge sheet, Accused No.1 developed intimacy with the petitioner-A2 herein and on account of the said intimacy Accused No.1 is harassing the 2nd respondent herein for additional dowry. May be it is true that there is dowry harassment, but this Court is of the view that the petitioner- A2 herein is in no way related to the husband of the 2nd respondent-complainant. Since the petitioner-A2 herein is not related to the husband of the 2nd respondent in any manner, the provisions of Section 498-A of I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act do not get attracted. In so far as the other allegations of trespass and criminal intimidation leveled against the petitioner-A2 are concerned, on perusal of the charge sheet, it is seen that those allegations have not been made out against the petitioner herein. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court has no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the continuance of the criminal proceedings against the petitione-A2 herein is nothing but an abuse of process of Court. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings initiated against the petitioner-A2 in C.C.No.482 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the XIII- Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad,, are hereby quashed. __________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 21.01.2011 Gsn.