HOUSE MOTION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE: ANDHRA PRADESH: AT HYDERABAD SUNDAY THE TENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI B.CHANDRA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3199 OF 2009 IN CRIME.NO. 100 OF 2009 Between: 1. Smt. Nazeer Bano, W/o Syed Naimathullah, Aged about 55 yrs, Occ: Household, R/o 1-6-676, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2. Smt. Zaheda Tasneem W/o Farhan Ishaqi, Aged 36 yrs, Occ: Housewife, R/o 3-1-118, Kachiguda, Hyderabad. …Petitioners/Accused A N D 1. The State of A.P. rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad. …Respondent/Respondent Petition filed under Sections 437 & 439 of the Crl.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioners on bail in the Crime No.100/2009 on the file of W.P.S. CRIME.S. Hyderabad in the interest of justice. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Mohammed Adnan, Advocate for the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor, on behalf of the respondent. The Court made the following Order: This Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 437 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short Cr.P.C.) seeking bail to the petitioners/accused in Crime.No.100 of 2009 on the file of W.P.S.CCS, Hyderabad. This matter came up before me as a House Motion. Sri Mohammed Adnan, learned Counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the defacto-complainant, who has obtained divorce from her husband on 04-02-2009, lodged a false complaint against her husband, parents-in-law and sister-in-law, and that the petitioners, who are her mother-in-law and sister-in-law, have been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 08-05-2009. He further submitted that the contents of the First Information Report themselves show that only to harass the petitioners, a false complaint has been lodged by the defacto-complainant. Perused the documents. Heard the learned Counsel representing the Public Prosecutor. Since it appears that there is urgency in the matter, the same is taken up as a House Motion. As seen from the contents of the First Information Report, the marriage of the defacto-complainant was performed with Syed Jaweed Erfan on 01-07-2001 and they resided in America. It is alleged that the husband, parents-in-law and sister-in- law of the defacto-complainat harassed her demanding additional dowry. However, as seen from the contents of the First Information Report, the defacto-complainant herself left her husband’s house on 27th November 2007 with her children. A perusal of the record shows that the defacto-complainant lodged a complaint against her father-in-law that he harassed her minor daughter, but according to the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the said case ended in acquittal. The record further shows that the defacto-complainant obtained divorce from her husband on 04-02- 2009 before the Civil Court of New Jersey, Middlesex County Chancery Division Family Part vide docket No.FM-12-1341-08F. The First Information Report also shows that she was harassed by her parents-in-laws, when she was in India for about six months in the year 2003. Thus, all the instances seem to have occurred before November, 2007 and subsequently, she has obtained divorce from her husband on 4th February, 2009. Thus, it appears that after obtaining divorce, the defacto-complainant lodged a police complainant on 04-03-2009, basing on which, the present case has been registered. The main allegations have been made against the husband. The petitioners are women and the first petitioner is aged about 55 years. Prima facie, it appears that the petitioners are entitled for bail and no useful purpose will be served by keeping them in jail. On the face of the record, it appears that the complaint has bee lodged two years after the defacto complainant separated from her husband and after divorce has been granted between the defacto-complainant and her husband. In the circumstances, I feel that the petitioners are entitled for bail. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the petitioners shall be enlarged on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties for a likesum each to the satisfaction of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. Both the petitioners are directed to deposit their passports, if any, until further orders. Sd/- K.SACHIDANANDA SARMA ASSIST REGISTRAR-CUM-VACATION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Police (D.C.P) C.I.D. having office at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad. 3. The Station House Officer, Central Crime Police Station(Women Police Station), Hyderabad. 4. Two CCs to the Additional Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad (o.u.t). 5. Two C.D. Copies. 6. One CC to Sri Mohammed Adnan, Advocate (opuc). Note: “CC. No. 100 of 2009” mentioned in the order dated: 10-05-2009 in Criminal Petition SR No. 11848 of 2009 is corrected as “Crime No. 100 of 2009” as per the order of the Court dated: 12-05-2009 in CRLMP NO. 3047 of 2009 and also Criminal Petition SR. No. 11848 of 2009 is numbered as Criminal Petition No. 3199 of 2009. Substitute this amended order in place of the previous order, which was already dispatched on 10-05-2009 SD/-M. SURYANARAYANA MURTHY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR HIGH COURT Date of amendment 12-05-2009 DT: 10-5-2009 (Amended on 12-05-2009) ORDER CRL.P. NO.3199 OF 2009 ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION.