IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3228 OF 2011 BETWEEN V.V. Kesava Rao … Petitioner AND Voodi Bohi Sridevi and another … Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3228 OF 2011 ORDER: Heard Sri T. Pradyumna Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short ‘Cr.P.C’). The petitioner is seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.123 of 2011 of Visakhapatnam III Town Police Station which was registered for an offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C) and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. 3. The petitioner is admittedly the husband of the defacto complainant who is shown as first respondent herein. It is brought to my notice that the root cause for the trouble between the petitioner and his wife is the attitude of one Sridevi who is said to be the sister of the defacto complainant. Many contentions have been raised by Sri T. Pradyumna Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner but all those contentions pertain to his defence in the matter. He invited my attention even to the language of Section 498-A of the I.P.C and tried to argue that the allegations made against the petitioner do not show any of the ingredients of the said offence. I am however unable to agree with his contention. 4. It may be noted and as already mentioned supra, the petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant and there are many allegations in the complaint which do disclose an offence punishable under Section 498-A of I.P.C. The question ultimately is whether it is a false complaint or the allegations are true and it has to be decided on evidence and that can be done by the Trial Court. It is also brought to my notice that the petitioner earlier gave a complaint/report to the police against the sister of the defacto complainant and that is under investigation and as a counter blast to the said case the petitioner’s wife filed this complaint. 5. What should be noted is many of the contentions raised by the petitioner raise questions about truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations made against him which cannot be decided in a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. 6. Accordingly, this criminal petition is dismissed. ______________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J April 13, 2011 SP THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3228 OF 2011 April 13, 2011 SP