HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4811 OF 2009 ORDER: This criminal petition is filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing further proceedings against the petitioners-A.2 to A.5 in CC No.394 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Gudur. 2. Heard both sides. 3. Based on the complaint given by 2nd respondent, police registered a case in Cr.No.59 of 2008 against the petitioners-A.2 to A.5 and another, for the offence under section 498-A IPC and after due investigation filed charge sheet, which was taken cognizance by the learned Magistrate in CC No.394 of 2008. According to the complainant, her marriage with A.1 was performed on 27.08.1998 and at the time of the marriage, her father gave dowry of Rs.50,000/- besides 20 sovereigns of gold, chetak scooter, colour TV and that subsequently, her husband-A.1 lost his job, as he met with an accident and the complainant’s father used to arrange Rs.4,000/- every month for the household expenses. The complainant alleges that her husband A.1 and his parents A.2, and A.3, A.1’s sister A.5 and her husband A.4, were harassing the complainant demanding her to bring additional dowry from her parents. It is further alleged that as the said demand was not met, A.1 filed divorce OP No.12 of 2002 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupati and later, the matter ended in a compromise on 05.09.2002, as the complainant’s father gave Rs.1,00,000/- for starting a business by A.1. It is further alleged that not satisfied with the same, accused again started harassing the complainant for additional dowry and as a result of mediation by elders, the complainant rejoined the husband and A.1 has taken away 20 sovereigns of gold promising to return the same. It is further alleged that subsequently, the accused left for Tirupati leaving the complainant at Gudur and a week later, telephoned to her demanding Rs.1,00,000/- and threatening that in the event of non payment, he would marry another girl. The complainant further alleged that on enquiry, through relations, she came to know that on the instigation of A.4, who is the son-in-law of A.2 and A.3, A.1 was contemplating second marriage. 4. A perusal of the complaint would disclose that specific allegations pertaining to the repeated demands of additional dowry from time to time and subjecting the complainant to harassment and ill-treatment in connection with the said demand have been made, not only against A.2 and A.3 parents of A.1, but also against A.4 and A.5. It is specifically alleged that A.5 sister of A.1 and A.4 husband of A.5 have been instigating A.1 in the matter of making demand for additional dowry and also subjecting her to ill- treatment and harassing on more than one occasion and A.5 even made arrangements for a second marriage of A.1 with another girl. 5. Having regard to the nature of the offences alleged and also specific allegations made against the petitioners-A.2 to A.5, it is considered not a fit case to invoke the inherent powers of the court under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing further proceedings against the petitioners in CC No.394 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Gudur. The truth or otherwise of the said allegations is however a matter to be considered on evidence that may be adduced during the course of trial. There are absolutely no valid or sufficient grounds to quash further proceedings against the petitioners-A.2 to A.5. 6. In the result, the criminal petition is dismissed. G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 08.12.2011 bss