THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 418 of 2009 ORDER: The present petition is filed by the petitioners/A-2 to A-4 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.704 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Anakapalli, which was filed for the offences under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”). The complaint was lodged by the wife of A-1 stating that their marriage was performed on 24.01.2007 and some cash and ornaments were presented. At that time she was working as a trainee at Hyderabad and her husband was working in Chennai and she was taken to Chennai. In October, 2007, her husband went to Belgium on training and returned only in February, 2008. The allegation was also specific about the facts that he demanded Rs.2,50,000/- and a car and her parents informed that they cannot give it. Thereafter, some mediation is said to have taken place and the divorce application is also said to have been filed by the 1st accused. A-4 is said to be cousin of A-1 and at his house the talks of compromise are said to have taken place. After completion of the investigation, the police have filed a charge sheet against all the accused. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that though there are absolutely no allegations of attracting any ingredients under Section 498-A of IPC so as to say that there was cruelty or harassment on the part of A-4 and even from the allegations in the charge sheet, the talks of compromise are said to have been taken place in the house of A-4 only. In fact, the material in the charge sheet clearly goes to show that the demand for car and the cash was made only by A-1. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, the allegations in the charge sheet being very vague and the 4th accused, who is the 3rd petitioner herein, has never lived within the neighbourhood of the 1st accused or complainant and he was only a resident of Secunderabad, whereas the other accused are residents of Chennai and the complainant is said to be residing at Hyderabad. In view of the circumstances, the proceedings for offences under Section 498-A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Act against A-4 cannot be said to be based on any material and the prosecution against him has to be quashed. Therefore, the proceedings against A-4/3rd petitioner are quashed. So far as A-2 and A-3 are concerned, they are the parents of A- 1 and though there are no specific allegations of any harassment, they are said to have participated in the talks and also made some demands. In view of the above circumstances, the proceedings against A-2 and A-3 cannot be quashed. However, their appearance is dispensed with except on the date of examination under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and on the date of judgment. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. ________________________ N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO, J Date: 17-11-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 418 of 2009 17-11-2011 MR