THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.8830 of 2011 ORDER: Petitioners approach this Court by invoking the provisions under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.499 of 2011 of Kushaiguda Police Station, Cyberabad District, wherein they were arrayed as accused for the offence punishable under Section 498(A) IPC. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. The main contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners are: 1. In the entire complaint, the allegations are only against the husband of the second respondent; 2. the marriage of the first accused and the de facto complainant is a love marriage and the petitioners never accept the marriage; 3. at no point of time, they lived together and there is no specific allegation. This Court perused the entire complaint and also heard the arguments. In the said complaint lodged by the second respondent- complainant, the first paragraph runs as follows: “As I have specified earlier, my husband and I were joined in holy matrimony on our own will. While my family wholeheartedly supported our inter-caste marriage, my in-laws were very disappointed that my husband was marrying on his own accord. Because of this, I have not been treated well by my in-laws (Shri K.Srinivasachary & Smt.K.Jayalakshmi) and I have often been mentally tortured by them on various occasions only with the ulterior motive of deriving money from me. They have communicated to me on several occasions that if our marriage had not happened, they would set up the marriage of their son to someone from a wealthier family, and have continued to harass me financially, causing me a lot of mental agony. Even during her visit during my cousin’s wedding which was held in Bangalore, in 2007, my mother-in-law created a big scene with me and my mother regarding her disappointment of marrying her son without any financial gains and had left in a hurry causing a lot of embarrassment to me and my family.” It clearly indicates that after the marriage, aggrieved over the inter caste and love marriage, the petitioners herein harassed the de facto complainant and also humiliated her by saying that if they arrange a marriage for their son in their caste, they should have get additional dowry. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that they have not lived together, but at the same time, he submits that the petitioners are residing at L.B.Nagar and the de facto complainant and her husband also lived at L.B.Nagar. Further more, the contention raised by the learned counsel whether they lived together or not, is a matter to be investigated. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the investigation at the stage. If the petitioners apprehend arrest in the hands of respondent-police, they are at liberty to approach the District and Sessions Judge concerned by filing an application for anticipatory bail. On such filing, the District and Sessions Judge is directed to consider the same favourably. With above observation, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. Miscellaneous petitions filed in this Criminal Petition, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 22nd September 2011 Rns