HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.2495 OF 2009 DATED.02-12-2011 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the Petitioner/Accused under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash proceedings in Crime No.160 of 2009, pending on the file of the Court of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B. Nagar, registered for offences punishable under Sections 406, 417, 495, 496 and 506 I.P.C. related to Uppal Police station, Cyberabad. 2. Whereas the Petitioner is the Accused, the Respondent No.2 is the De-facto Complainant in the Calender Case. For the sake of convenience, I refer the parties as arrayed in the Calender Case. 3. The case set out in the complaint in brief is as follows : The marriage of the de-facto Complainant with the accused was performed on 28-03-2007 at Qazi office, Yaqutpura, Hyderabad. Prior to that marriage, the accused married four women namely Naseem, Malaika, Asma and Nahid Begum and in fact concealing those four earlier marriages and by playing fraud and cheating married the de-facto Complainant. Subsequently, to defame the character of the de-facto Complainant, the accused started spreading rumors that her character was not good. Further, on 21-11-2008 at about 10-00 p.m. he went to the house of the de-facto Complainant and abused and threatened her with dire consequences and put her in mental agony and finally deserted her. Subsequently, on coming to know about the 5th marriage of the accused with the de-facto complainant under such circumstance, her father died. Hence, the Accused is liable to be punished for the alleged offences. 4. It is the contention of learned counsel for the Accused that the accused married the Complainant only after giving divorce to his earlier three wives and he never involved in the alleged offences and there is no prima-facie material to prosecute him. According to him, prior to his marriage with the complainant he married only three women but not four women as alleged and the de-facto complainant filed this case only to harass him and hence the proceedings in the Calender Case are liable to be quashed. 5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the Respondents-State has opposed the petition. 6. The point for consideration is whether sufficient grounds are there in order to quash the proceedings as prayed for? 7. In fact, there is a question of fact as to whether the Accused involved in concealing the said marriages before going to marry the de-facto complainant and whether there was any criminal breach of trust, intimidation and other aspects on his part. Unless necessary trial in the case is conducted, the complicity of the accused in the case cannot be decided. It is pertinent to note here that the investigation of the case is in progress and after the completion of the investigation of the case, the Police can come to a conclusion as to whether the accused committed the said offences or not. Hence, I see no grounds to allow the petition at this stage. Accordingly, with the above observations, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. __________________________ G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J Dated:02-12-2011. Dsh. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY 282 CRIMINAL PETITION No.2495 OF 2009 December, 02, 2011 DSH