THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos. 4894 OF 2007 ORDER: 1 This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1227 of 2001 on the file of the Court of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, (East and North) Ranga Reddy District registered for the offence punishable under section 498-A of IPC. 2 Brief facts, as per the charge sheet filed by the Sub Inspector of Police, L.B. Nagar P.S. Ranga Reddy District, are that the marriage of the de facto complainant i.e. second respondent herein was performed with the first accused in the case. At the time of marriage, her parents gave one Almira, two tola of gold, one sewing machine and Rs.10,000/- cash towards dowry. After the first accused retired from service in the year 1998, they both went to Tirupathi where they purchased a house worth Rs.65,000/- out of which Rs.60,000/- was contributed by her brother. In January 1999 the first accused received retirement benefits and when the second respondent proposed to return the money which she brought from her brother in connection with purchase of their house at Tirupathi, the first accused started harassing her with a demand to bring additional amount from her parents. It is further alleged that along with the first accused, the petitioners herein also started harassing her both mentally and physically with a demand to get additional dowry from her parents’ house. Hence the complaint. 3 From a perusal of the charge sheet coupled with the statement of the second respondent this court is of the view that the continuance of the proceedings in so far as the petitioners herein are concerned, it is nothing but an abuse of process of the court. It is true, as contended by the learned counsel for the second respondent that admittedly there is an allegation in the charge sheet, but, in my considered view such an omnibus allegation is not sufficient. The said allegation is extracted as under: “Her husband and brothers-in-law Nageswara Rao and Ramesh have subjected her to severe physical and mental torture for additional dowry.” 4 As stated supra, it is totally an omnibus allegation. How the complainant i.e. second respondent herein was physically and mentally tortured is not specifically mentioned. Further, from a reading of the cause title it is clear that the first accused is resident of Bharatnagar Colony, K.G. Pally Post, Chittoor District, whereas the petitioners who are A.2 and A.3 in the case are residing at Tirupathi. First petitioner i.e. A.2 is working as an advocate clerk and the second petitioner i.e. A.3 is working as messenger in Andhra Bank. Further, from a reading of the statement of the second respondent who is the de facto complainant, this court is the view that the petitioners have in fact chastised the first accused i.e. husband of the second respondent. In the said statement it is stated that when the second respondent informed about the harassment meted out by her at the hands of her husband, the petitioners i.e. brothers-in-law of the second respondent have chastised him. All these circumstances clearly reveal that the petitioners are falsely implicated in the case because of the harassment meted out to her at the hands of her husband. Hence this court has no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the said continuation of the proceedings in so far as the petitioners herein who are A.2 and A.3 in the case are concerned is nothing but an abuse of the process of the court. 5 Accordingly this petition is allowed and the said proceedings in C.C.No. 1227 of 2001 on the file of the Court of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, (East and North) Ranga Reddy District registered for the offence punishable under section 498-A of IPC are hereby quashed in so far as the petitioners are concerned. The court below is at liberty to proceed against the first accused i.e. husband of the second respondent herein. ----------------- Kvsn 14.06.2010