HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.1226 of 2009 Date: December 08, 2011 Between: 1. Syed Ali Akbar Hussain & 3 others … Petitioners/ A-1 to A-4 And 1. State of A.P., rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad & another … Respondents * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.1226 of 2009 O R D E R: This application is filed to quash proceedings in C.C. No.19 of 2009 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. 2. A private complaint was filed by the wife of A-1 and the matter was referred to the police and the police after due investigation has filed charge sheet. 3. The disputes between A-1 and the complainant are with regard to the marriage and the factum of giving some money and also the failure of marital relationship between them. It is also the contention of the complainant that the accused persons having bore grudge against her when her father failed to pay huge money. It was stated that two incidents have taken place, one on 16.12.2007 and another on 17.12.2007 whereunder a criminal trespass and also beating of the complainant’s father was said to have been done apart from misappropriation of some articles. 4. The point for consideration is whether there are reasonable and sufficient grounds to quash the proceedings? 5. Point: Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the private complaint is abuse of process of law and in fact the husband has filed an application before the Family Court and obtained permission for custody of the child and on 16.12.2007 in pursuance of the orders of the Court dated 12.12.2007 in O.P. No.795 of 2007 he has gone to the house of the complainant and there a law and order problem has been created. He also claims to have given a complaint on 16.12.2007 to the police Narayanaguda. It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioners that there was continuous harassment of the complainant by giving false complaints and in fact the matter was taken up to the High Court when the visiting rights also denied and in 2008 also a similar complaint has been given by the petitioners and therefore in view of the above circumstances the proceedings are to be quashed. 6. From the material contentions raised by the petitioners it is not in dispute that on 16.12.2007 the accused have gone to the house of the complainant and her father where the incident is said to have taken place. It is a mutual accusation against each other as to who have behaved unruly. Therefore, the truth of the allegation of attack on the complainant or her father can only be assessed by evidence. It cannot be taken as falsely from the face of it when the complaint said to have given by the petitioners also disclosed a disturbance on 16.12.2007 near the alleged scene of offence. So far as the offence on 17.12.2007 is concerned it is said to be a consequence of the incident on 16.12.2007. It is true that there is lot of material filed by the petitioners about the litigation between the parties and all these things are subsequent to 16.12.2007 and 17.12.2007 which have no bearing about the criminal case which the police after due investigation have filed. 7. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, and in view of the admitted strained relationship between the parties and also the factum of presence of the petitioners at the scene of offence on 16.12.2007 and prima facie evidence is disclosed, it is not the rarest of rare cases where proceedings are to be quashed. But however taking into consideration the age of A-2 and A-3 their attendance is dispensed with except on the date of framing of charges, examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and the date of judgment. 8. Accordingly the criminal petition is disposed of. The observations made in this order have no bearing on the trial of the case. The lower Court is directed to dispose of C.C.No.19 of 2009 within six months. _____________________________ N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO, J. Date: December 08, 2011. BSB