THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR Criminal Petition No.7480 of 2007 Date: 26.04.2010 Between: L. Shyamsunder Reddy … Petitioner AND The State of A.P. Rep.by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad, and another … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR Criminal Petition No.7480 of 2007 ORDER: This Criminal Petition has been filed praying to quash the proceedings in D.V.C. No.7 of 2007 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nalgonda. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The petitioner herein is the younger brother of husband of second respondent herein. The second respondent filed a complaint alleging that she married one L. Santhosh Reddy, advocate and at the time of marriage, her parents presented Rs.1,80,000/- in cash and 23 tulas of gold, 1.5 kgs of silver and one house plot at Suryapet, worth Rs.35,000/- and home appliances and also Rs.50,000/- to her husband’s sister as ‘aadapaduchu katnam’. Subsequently, they lead happy marital life for 3 months at her in-laws house. Later, her husband, her father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law started harassing her for additional dowry and insisting to sell away the house site given to her by her parents. She also made allegations against the sister-in-law’s husband. 3. A reading of the complaint makes it clear that no specific allegations have been made against the petitioner herein. She has not referred any single incident involving the petitioner. Of course, in the Form-I submitted by her along with complaint, she has mentioned the name of the petitioner at Sl.No.4. 4. Sri C. Padmanabha Reddy, learned Senior Counsel submits that when the complaint does not reveal any allegation against the petitioner herein, he cannot be prosecuted and therefore, the proceedings cannot be continued against him and continuation of proceedings will amount to not only harassing the petitioner but also abusing the process of law. He has also submitted that the Special Mobile Court-cum-XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad in his judgment dated 21.12.2009 in C.C.No.1129 of 2006 found all the accused including the petitioner herein not guilty of the offence u/s.498-A IPC. It is also his submission that the third respondent gave birth to a female child on 14.02.2002 and since then she is living with her parents and the petitioner herein did not reside with A.1, his elder brother since 2004 onwards and therefore, even it cannot be said that the petitioner was residing in the same house, in which the de facto complainant was residing during the relevant period. 5. Anyhow, a reading of the complaint itself does not show any ingredients of the domestic violence have been made out against the petitioner. Therefore, as far as the petitioner herein is concerned, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed. 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the impugned proceedings are set aside as far as the petitioner (A.4) is concerned. __________________ B. CHANDRA KUMAR, J Date: 26.04.2010 Isn