THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRIMINAL PETITION No.4634 OF 2009 DATED:23-12-2010 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashing further proceedings in C.C.No.310 of 2006 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Siddipet. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the 1st respondent-State. None appeared for the 2nd respondent. Perused the record. 3. Based on the complaint given by the 2nd respondent, police registered a case in Cr.No.31 of 2006 for the offence under Section 498-A IPC. After due investigation, police filed charge sheet against A1- husband and petitioners-A2 to A7 for the offences under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 1st petitioner-A2 is the father; 2nd petitioner-A3 is the mother and petitioners 3 to 6 are the sisters and brothers-in-law of A1. According to the prosecution, the marriage of the 2nd respondent- complainant with A1 was performed on 02-08-2004 and at the time of marriage, the parents of the complainant gave dowry of Rs.3,00,000/- and 21 tulas of gold besides other household articles. The complainant alleges that one week after the marriage, her husband and the petitioners started demanding additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/- and subjected her to harassment and the parents of the complainant fulfilled the said demand and gave Rs.1,00,000/- as additional dowry. She further alleges that since fifteen days prior to giving the complaint, the accused again started demanding additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/- more on the ground that the marriage of A1’s sister was fixed and money is required for payment of dowry in connection with that marriage and also for undergoing the marriage expenses. 4. A perusal of the complaint and also the charge sheet would disclose that insofar as the petitioners 3 to 6 are concerned, no specific allegation is made against them nor any specific overt act attributed to them, pertaining to the alleged demand of additional dowry and harassment. The thrust of the allegations is directed only against the husband and his parents. The only allegation made against the petitioners 3 to 6 is that they also along with the other accused subjected the complainant to harassment. The details of the alleged harassment with reference to any dates or events are also not mentioned. Under those circumstances, it is considered that in the absence of any specific allegations against the petitioners-A3 to A6, prima facie, attracting the ingredients of the alleged offences against them, it is considered that continuance of further proceedings against the petitioners 3 to 6, based on the vague allegation, is only an abuse of process of law. It is therefore considered a fit case to invoke the inherent powers of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and quash the further proceedings against the petitioners 3 to 6. However, there are no valid or sufficient grounds to quash further proceedings against the petitioners 1 and 2, who are the parents of A1. The proceedings against A1 and the petitioners 1 and 2 shall go on. Further proceedings against the petitioners 3 to 6 in C.C.No.310 of 2006 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Siddipet are held liable to be quashed and they are accordingly quashed. 5. In the result, Criminal Petition is allowed in part insofar as the petitioners 3 to 6 are concerned and dismissed insofar as the petitioners 1 and 2 are concerned. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 23rd December, 2010 Tsy