IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENT FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.5266 OF 2009 BETWEEN: Atmakur Manasa W/o. G. Prasad and others …. Petitioners And The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP, Hyderabad and another …. Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU CRIMINAL PETITON No.5266 OF 2009 ORDER: The petitioners / A1 to A3 are accused of offences punishable under Sections 494, 420 and 506 IPC in crime No.309 of 2009 of Malkajgiri Police Station, Cyberabad. A1 is claimed to be wife of the 2nd respondent / de facto complainant. A2 is the mother of A1. A3 is brother of A1. It is alleged that after marrying the 2nd respondent, A1 married Khammam Vijaysimha Reddy as her 2nd husband and Sudarshan as her 3rd husband. It is further alleged that on 05-04- 2009, A1 to A3 put the 2nd respondent in fear of injury and took his signatures on stamp papers and blank white papers and that they took away gold ornaments worth Rs.15,00,000/- without his consent from his locker and also committed theft of cash of Rs.2,00,000/- and that A1 has been threatening the 2nd respondent to lodge false complaint against him if the 2nd respondent complained against her to anyone. The 2nd respondent also alleged that A1 is trying to leave the country and that the accused are planning to eliminate the 2nd respondent by employing Gundas. 2. It is contended by the petitioners’ counsel that there is no valid marriage between A1 and Vijaysimha Reddy. 3. Validity of the marriage is a question, which has to be decided by the investigating officer after collecting evidence thereof. This Court, in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., cannot go into the truth or validity of the marriages of A1 with the 2nd respondent or with Vijaysimha Reddy as they are questions of fact. I do not find any valid or legal reasons to stall the investigation in this case at its threshold. 4. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. ___________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU, J February 24, 2011. KTL