HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9768 OF 2009 Date: 27-09-2010 Between: Lanka Satyanarayana and another. --- Petitioners/A-5 & A-6. And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Public Prosecutor, High court of A.P., Hyderabad and another --- Respondents. This Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9768 OF 2009 ORDER: The petitioners 1 and 2/A-5 and A-6 are accused of offences punishable under Section 498-A/34 I.P.C and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1984, in Crime No.106 of 2009 of Kakinada II Town (Law and Order) Police Station. Private complaint filed by the second respondent/de-facto complainant was referred by the Magistrate for investigation and report under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. and thereupon the police issued F.I.R. 2) The only point urged by the petitioners before this Court is that A-5 and A-6 are neither relatives nor family members of A- 1 who is husband of the second respondent and that therefore no offence under Section 498-A I.P.C. can be alleged against them. Insofar as offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act are concerned, there are no allegations or attributions against A-5 and A-6. As per para No.7 of the complaint, A-5 and A-6 were mediators for the marriage between A-1 and the second respondent. It is alleged that when parents of the second respondent put the issue before A-5 and A-6, they did not care about the issue as they are close associates of A-1 and that they also used to scold and demand them to provide money to the accused and they used to instigate A-1 to harass the complainant. When there is no dispute that A-5 and A-6 are not members of A-1’s family and are not relatives of A- 1, the question of they being impleaded in a case relating to offence punishable under Section 498-A I.P.C. does not arise at all. It may be a fact that during mediation, they have supported A-1’s version. That will not lead to the conclusion that they are also liable for offence punishable under Section 498-A I.P.C. This Court is satisfied that registration of this Crime against A-5 and A-6 is a clear abuse of process of law. 3) In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing F.I.R. in Crime No.106 of 2009 of Kakinada II Town (Law and Order) Police Station insofar as the petitioners 1 and 2/A-5 and A-6 are concerned. _____________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J. Date: 27-09-2010. DSH