HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.1201 of 2008 DT.22.07.2010 Srinivasa Sekhar and others …Petitioners V. State, S.H.O., Renigunta P.S. and another … Respondents The Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.1201 of 2008 ORDER:- Petitioners, who are A1 to A7 in C.C.No.515 of 2007 pending on the file of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati, charged for the offence punishable under Section 498-A r/w 34 IPC, arise out of Crime No.76 of 2007 on the file of Renigunta Police Station, filed this petition for quashing the proceedings initiated against them. The complaint allegations clearly discloses that the marriage of the complainant with the 1st petitioner/A1 was performed four years back on 02.03.1995 and they were blessed with two children i.e., Bharath and Nandini. For seven years, he looked after her well. Thereafter, her husband at the encouragement of her mother-in-law and brother-in-laws i.e., A3 to A6, started demanding money from her parents in the form of additional dowry of Rs.50,000/- and thus humiliating her. Further, her husband developed illegal intimacy with one Aruna and the complainant was forced by A1 to get Rs.1,00,000/- from her parents. While so, on 20.04.2001 at 10 p.m., while she was present at her husband’s house, the husband demanded whether she got money and when she expressed her inability and the financial crisis of her parents, immediately her mother-in-laws, sister-in-laws and their husbands have picked up a quarrel with her, as she is objecting the words of her husband and instructed the other accused to kill her. So saying the husband caught hold of her tuft dragged her out of the house, then her mother-in-law beat her with broom stick on her face and beat her with hands. Meanwhile, her sister-in-laws and their husbands have instigated her husband and mother-in-law to kill her and let them burn the body on the night itself. Out of fear she came out of her house to the temple, where A1 and her mother-in-law came and beat her. On the said complaint, police after due investigation laid the charge sheet under section 498-A r/w 34 IPC and section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The statements of L.Ws.1 to 8 recorded by the police have not been enclosed along with the petition. The fact remains that the O.P.No.32 of 2007 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupati filed by the petitioner, seeking dissolution of the marriage filed on 09.06.2007, is still pending and the present complaint is filed on 26.07.2007. Since the complaint allegations clearly discloses that the husband/A1 and mother-in-law/A2 beat the complainant and the other accused instigated them, the prosecution should be given an opportunity to prove the accusation made against the petitioners/A1 to A7. It is not a case where the proceedings have to be quashed without giving an opportunity to the prosecution. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the appearance of A2 to A7 on all the relevant dates in the said C.C., is dispensed with except when their presence is required to answer the incriminating evidence adduced against them and they can be represented by A1. Therefore, if any application is filed on behalf of A2 to A7 under Section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Magistrate can pass appropriate orders, dispensing their presence on recording necessary undertaking. _______________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J 22nd July 2010 lmv