HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5622 OF 2008 DATE: 01-04-2011 BETWEEN: Veeramachineni Venkata Satya Vara Prasad - - - Petitioner/ Accused. AND 1. V. Samrajyam @ Samrajya Lakshmi. 2. The State of A.P., Rep. by Public prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and another. - - - Respondents/ Complainant. This Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5622 OF 2008 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to quash entire proceedings in C.C. No.175 of 2007 registered for offences punishable under Sections 498-A of I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, on the file of learned II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 2. The petitioner is the accused and the first respondent is the de- facto complainant and the second respondent is complainant in the Calendar Case. For the sake of convenience the parties hereinafter will be referred as they arrayed in the Calendar Case. 3. Heard Sri T. Pradyumna Kumar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents-State. 3. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows : Marriage between the accused and the de-facto complainant was performed on 27-01-19999 and at the time of marriage, dowry of Rs.3,00,000/- and one gold ring and three sovereigns of gold were given to the accused. After the marriage, they lived happily for some time and later the accused got addicted to bad vices and as such he used to come to the house late in the night in a drunken stage and used to abuse the de-facto complainant and beat her and thereafter started demanding additional dowry. Due to unbearable harassment of the petitioner the de facto complaint gave a report against the accused on the file of Penamaluru police station, Vijayawada which was registered and after necessary investigation the police filed charge sheet numbered as C.C. No.175 of 2007 on the file of II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 4. It is the contention of learned counsel for the accused that the de-facto complainant implicated all the family members and friends of the accused, whereas the Sub-Inspector of Police concerned deleted all their names except the name of the accused and the de-facto complainant is not the wife of the accused and on the other hand, the first husband of the de-facto complainant namely Gullapalli Vishnuvardhan Rao filed a report against the de-facto complainant, which is registered as crime No.156 of 2007 on the file of Penamaluru police station for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 495 and 506 of I.P.C. on the ground that the de-facto complainant cheated him by deceitful means and married him and also threatened him for transferring his property in her favour and so on which clearly proves that her first marriage has been subsisting and therefore the charge sheet on hand is not maintainable. 5. Therefore, it is to be mainly considered as to whether sufficient grounds are there in order to quash the criminal case? 6. It is pertinent to note here that sufficient material is there in order to prosecute the accused for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Further, in the other crime there is a question as to whether the de-facto complainant married the alleged first husband and cheated him and threatened him and so on which are subject to proof. Therefore, basing upon the other case at this stage, the case on hand can not be quashed. 7. Therefore, for the foregoing reasons there are no merits in this Criminal Petition and accordingly the petition is liable to be dismissed. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. __________________________ G. KRISHNA MOHANR EDDY, J Dated: 01-04-2011 Dsh.