IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRL.P.No.4862 OF 2009 Between: Thavidaboina Sreedhar and two others …Petitioners A n d Thavidaboina Padmavathi and another ..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRL.P.No.4862 OF 2009 ORDER: This criminal petition is ﬁled under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing further proceedings against the petitioners/A-3 to A-5 in C.C.No.469 of 2009, on the ﬁle of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nalgonda. 2. Heard. Perused the record. 3. Based on the complaint given by the 1st respondent herein, the police registered a case in Cr.No.63 of 2008 against the petitioners and two others for the oﬀences under Sections 498-A and 506 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and after investigation ﬁled charge sheet against all of them in C.C.No.469 of 2009 for the said offences. 4. A-1 is the husband and A-2 is the mother-in- law of the complainant. The 1st petitioner/A-3 is the brother and petitioners 2 and 3/A-4 and A-5 are the married sisters of A-1. According to the complainant, her marriage with A-1 was performed on 26.04.2001 and at the time of marriage, her parents gave Rs.2 lakhs and 8 tolas of gold and 20 tolas of silver towards dowry and that she was treated well for six months after marriage, but later all the accused started harassing her saying that she was issueless and were demanding her to bring more dowry. It is further alleged that on 18.11.2008, A- 1 beat her indiscriminately and abused her at the instigation of the other accused and informed the complainant’s father to take away the complainant along with him. 5. A perusal of the complaint and charge sheet would show that the thrust of the allegations pertaining to the alleged demand for additional dowry and alleged harassment and ill-treatment in connection therewith, is directed only against A-1 and his mother A-2. The only allegation made against the petitioners/A-3 to A-5 is that they also instigated A-1 to subject the complainant to ill- treatment and harassment. A-3 is brother and A-4 and A-5 are the married sisters of A-1 and they are all living separately. In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court and also this Court held that prosecution of all the family members of the matrimonial home based on unfounded and vague allegations is nothing but abuse of process of law. In the present case also, except making vague allegations of alleged instigation, no speciﬁc overt acts have been attributed as against petitioners/A- 3 to A-5 with reference to any date or event prima facie attracting the ingredients of the alleged offences. In the absence of any such speciﬁc allegations being made or speciﬁc overt acts being attributed and there being no incriminating material gathered during the course of investigation, it held that the prosecution of the petitioners/A-3 to A-5, based on the vague allegations of collusion and instigation, is unwarranted. It is, therefore, considered a ﬁt case where further proceedings against the petitioners/A-3 to A-5 in C.C.No.469 of 2009, on the ﬁle of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nalgonda, are liable to be quashed by invoking the inherent powers of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C and they are accordingly quashed. Proceedings against the other accused shall, however, go on. 6. In the result, the criminal petition is allowed as stated above. ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 24th November, 2011 Lrkm