THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3162 OF 2011 Date: 11-04-2011 Between: Bairagoni Nagaraju Goud and 2 others .. Petitioners And Bairagoni Rajitha @ Akhila and another .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3162 OF 2011 ORDER: Heard Sri D.Purnachandra Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioners. The point raised in this Criminal Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “Cr.P.C.) is whether there are grounds to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in the criminal case i.e. C.C.No.240 of 2010 on the file of the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate at Karimnagar. The petitioners 1 to 3 herein are accused 1 to 3 in the aforesaid criminal case. The 1st petitioner is the husband of the 1st respondent Rajitha herein and petitioners 2 and 3 are the parents of the 1st petitioner. The offences alleged against them are those punishable under Sections 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”) and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act (for short “the Act”) i.e. harassment and cruelty to a married woman and demand of dowry. The contention of Sri D.Purnachandra Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioners, is that originally in the case A-4 to A-7 i.e. the married sisters and some two other relatives of the 1st petitioner were also implicated by the 1st respondent, but the concerned police after considering the matter in their investigation deleted them from the case and filed charge sheet only against these petitioners. His further contention is that the allegations against the aforesaid 4 deleted accused and the petitioners 2 and 3 are similar and, therefore, atleast the case against petitioners 2 and 3 should be quashed. It may be noted that Sri D.Purnachandra Reddy, raised several points inviting my attention to the allegations in the First Information Report and also the allegations made in the charge sheet. All these points, in my opinion, constitute only a defence for the petitioners. The allegations in the charge sheet show that this is not a case where it can be said that even if the said allegations are believed no offences are made out. In these circumstances, I regret that I am unable to agree with the contentions of Sri D.Purnachandra Reddy. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not see any reasons to admit this Criminal Petition. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed at the admission stage. It shall be open for the petitioners 2 and 3 to make an application before the learned Magistrate for dispensing with their presence in the enquiry or trial and the learned Magistrate may consider it having regard to the ages of petitioners 2 and 3. It shall, however, be open for the learned Magistrate to insist upon their presence as and when it is felt necessary by him. ___________________ N.RAVI SHANKAR, J 11-04-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3162 OF 2011 Date: 11-04-2011 MR