HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2795 of 2010 ORDER: This criminal petition is filed by the petitioners-Accused Nos.2 to 6 seeking to quash Crime No.153 of 2009 of P.S. Jannaram, Adilabad District. 2. The 2nd respondent herein-complainant filed a private complaint before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Luxettipet, against the petitioners herein and another, alleging the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 r/w 109 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The learned Magistrate referred the matter to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for purpose of investigation and thus the said crime has been registered. 3. The averments of the private complaint are as follows: The complainant-2nd respondent is the legally wedded wife of accused No.1 and their marriage was solemnized on 20.02.1997 at her parents’ house at Jannaram village as per Muslim customs. At the time of marriage, the parents of 2nd respondent gave an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- as dowry , 10 grams of gold and household articles worth Rs.70,000/- to the accused. After the marriage, the complainant joined the society of the accused at Vadyal village and lived happily for one year. Thereafter, the accused started harassing and beating the complainant to bring additional dowry of Rs.2,00,000/- and on one occasion they necked her out of the house. Unable to bear their torture, the complainant filed a private complaint before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Luxettipet, for the offences under Sections 498-A, 506 r/w 109 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 4. It is mainly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that there was a divorce between the parties on 04.10.2009, and accordingly, Talaqnama was sent to the 2nd respondent, and in that context, the learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the said Talaqnama dated 04.10.2009. It is further contended that even from the averments of the complaint, no offence is made out against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent opposed the same. 5. It is true that the learned counsel for the petitioners tried to draw the attention of this Court to the Talaqnama dated 04.10.2009. But however, this Court is unable to take any assistance from the same for the reason that the Talaqnama has to be established in a competent court of law. Whether the Talaqnama is genuine or not can be established only after leading evidence. Hence, the first contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is rejected. 6. In so far as the second contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that there are no allegations against the petitioners herein, this Court looked into the complaint filed by the 2nd respondent. From a perusal of the complaint, this Court is thoroughly satisfied that there are very serious allegations against the petitioners herein. In fact, in the complaint, it is alleged as follows: 1) A.2 to A.6 tortured the complainant mentally and physically. 2) A.2 to A.6 even did not provide any food to the complainant. 3) A.1 to A.6 tried to kill the complainant by pressing her throat with a pillow. 7. When such serious allegations are made, it cannot be said that no allegations are made against the petitioners. Whether they are true or not, is a matter of investigation by the police for the reason that the matter has been referred to the police for investigation. If ultimately it is established that the allegations made against the petitioners are false, the police will definitely submit a report saying that the said allegations are false. But, it is not for this Court to hold that the said allegations are prima facie not true. In the light of the same, I see no merits in this petition. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _______________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J 15th June, 2010 CBS HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2795 of 2010 (Dismissed) Date:15-06-2010 CBS