IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWELVETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2356 OF 2009 Between: Dodda Brahmananda Reddy and others .....PETITIONERS AND State of Andhra Pradesh and another ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2356 OF 2009 ORDER: This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “Cr.P.C.”), is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/respondent Nos.2 to 7 in D.V.C.No.1 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Podili. 2. The allegations in the complaint would go to show that the marriage between respondent No.2/de facto complainant and her husband was solemnized on 11.05.2006. After the marriage, both the spouse led their marital life for some time at the house of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 at Markapur and later they shifted their family to Hyderabad, where the husband of respondent No.2 was working. Prior to that, when A1 worked in Agra, the petitioners harassed respondent No.2 for additional dowry through telephone. Respondent No.2 informed the same to her father and he gave Rs.3,40,000/- through a Demand Draft. While the spouse lived at Hyderabad, all the petitioners along with the husband of respondent No.2 use to harass and subjected respondent No.2 to cruelty by confining her in a room and beating her with pipes. On 24.11.2008, husband of respondent No.2 took respondent No.2 to her village Meerjapeta, dropped her there and assaulted her mother and father. Then the neighbours intervened and pacified the matter. On 25.11.2008, respondent No.2 gave a complaint, basing on which police registered a case in Crime No.44 of 2008 under Section 498A I.P.C. After completion of investigation, police filed charge sheet and the same was numbered as C.C.No.50 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Podili. Thereafter, respondent No.2 filed D.V.C.No.1 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Podili and the same was pending disposal. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that all the reliefs claimed are against respondent No.1 in the Domestic Violence Case, who is no other than the husband of respondent No.2 herein; that except seeking protection from the present petitioners, there are no other allegations levelled against them and hence, he prays to quash the proceedings against the present petitioners. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 contended that as the petitioners also harassed respondent No.2, she sought for protection from the petitioners and hence, he prays to dismiss the Criminal Petition. 5. Inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked when there is an abuse of process of Court or to secure ends of justice or to give effect to the orders passed under the Code. 6. Marriage of respondent No.2 with her husband took place about four years back. The present petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are the parents-in- law, petitioner No.3 is sister-in-law and petitioner Nos.5 and 6 are brother-in-laws of respondent No.2. Petitioner No.4 is the husband of petitioner No.3. Admittedly, the petitioners have not resided in a share household along with respondent No.2 at any point of time. The reliefs claimed in the Domestic Violence Case are against husband of respondent No.2, who is not a party to this proceeding. Omnibus allegations are levelled against the present petitioners stating that they are harassing respondent No.2. But, the nature of the harassment has not been specifically stated. Even though the case of respondent No.2 is to be accepted, all the reliefs claimed are against the husband of respondent No.2. Except seeking protection from the present petitioners, there are no other reliefs claimed against them. In view of the fact that the present petitioners are not residing together with respondent No.2 in a joint household, the question of harassing respondent No.2 by them does not arise. Therefore, continuation of proceedings against the present petitioners is nothing but abuse of process of Court. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the proceedings against the present petitioners in D.V.C.No.1 of 2009, on the file of the judicial Magistrate of First Class, Podili. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J August 12, 2010 MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2356 OF 2009 August 12, 2010