IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.3991 OF 2009 Between: Tsama Ramachandra Rao & 5 others … PETITIONERS And The State of A.P. & another … RESPONDENTS This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.3991 OF 2009 ORDER: 1. The petitioners 1 to 6/A2 to A7 are accused of offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 506 (Part II) I.P.C. and Sections 4 & 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in C.C.No.257 of 2008, on the file of Judicial Magistrate of the I Class, Razole. A1 is husband of the second respondent/de facto complainant. A2 and A3 are parents, A4 is younger brother and A5 is sister of A1. A6 is husband of A4. A7 is sister of A3. 2. On Perusal of charge sheet and statements of witnesses recorded by the police under Section 161 (3) Cr.P.C., it is evident that specific overt acts were alleged against A2, A3 and A5 regarding demand for additional dowry and presents. A4 is hardly in his teens. No specific allegations were made against A6 and A7, except they supporting A5. There was no allegation of demand by A6 and A7 directly to the de facto complainant. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that continuation of proceedings against A4, A6 and A7 is abuse of process of law. 3. It is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that the offence took place only at Kothapeta within the territorial jurisdiction of Kothapeta Magistrate and that the case was filed in Razole Magistrate Court. Both Kothapeta and Razole are in Konaseema area of East Godavari District only and they are almost adjacent places. In any event, the offences punishable under Sections 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act occurred in the territorial limits of Razole Magistrate. When part of cause of action had arisen within Razole limits, it cannot be said that Razole Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the same. 4. Hence, the criminal petition is partly allowed quashing proceedings in C.C.No.257 of 2008, on the file of Judicial Magistrate of the I Class, Razole, insofar as the petitioner Nos.3, 5 and 6/A4, A6 and A7 are concerned. The criminal petition is partly dismissed in respect of the petitioners 1, 2 and 4/A2, A3 and A5. ______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J August 13, 2010 KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITON No.3991 OF 2009 August 13, 2010 KL