HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.11156 of 2010 Date : 16.11.2011 Between : C. Sri Laxmi & others. …..Petitioners And The State of A.P., rep. by Public Prosecutor & another. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.11156 of 2010 ORDER : This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.469 of 2010 on the file of Central Crime Station, Hyderabad. The aforesaid crime is registered against the petitioners, who are accused Nos.3 to 7, and two others, for the alleged offences under Sections 498-A and 494 of IPC, on the complaint made by the 2nd respondent herein. In the complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent, it is alleged that she is married to the son of the 1st petitioner and the same was a love marriage performed in Arya Samaj in Sultan Bazar. It is alleged that only for a short period, they were comfortable, but thereafter, accused No.1 started harassing her demanding money towards dowry. It is stated that she has already given about Rs.6,00,000/- and a necklace weighing about 3 ½ tola as dowry. In the complaint, there is also an allegation on accused No.2 about threatening the life of the complainant. In her complaint, the complainant further stated that her husband married accused No.2 and is presently staying at Malakpet. On the aforesaid contents, she requested for taking action against the accused. Based on the contents of the above report, a crime is registered against the husband of the 2nd respondent and 2nd wife of accused No.1 and the petitioners, who are accused Nos.3 to 7, for the offences under Sections 498- A and 494 of IPC. In this petition, it is contended by Sri K.Manik Prabhu, learned counsel for petitioners that the petitioners are in no way concerned with the life of accused No.1. They are living separately and he has married the 2nd respondent on his own, and they are living separately. It is submitted that though the petitioners are in no way connected with accused No.1, based on the false complaint filed by the 2nd respondent, the present crime is registered by implicating them also. It is submitted that even if the contents of the complaint are taken as it is, there is no offence for proceeding with investigation for the offences under Sections 498-A and 494 of IPC against them. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondents that in view of the complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent, it is a matter for investigation. I have perused the complaint filed by the 2nd respondent before the Police. In the complaint, allegations are made only against accused No.1, who is the husband of 2nd respondent, and whom she has married and the marriage was a love marriage performed in Arya Samaj Mandir at Sultan Bazar, and it is not the marriage arranged by the petitioners/accused 3 to 7. The 1st petitioner is the mother of accused No.1, petitioners 2 and 4 are the daughters and petitioner Nos.3 and 5 are the sons-in-law of the 1st petitioner. There is no allegation of demanding dowry by the petitioners, in the complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent. Even with regard to the offence alleged under Section 494 of IPC, it is a matter for prosecution against the husband of the 2nd respondent i.e. accused No.1, but no case is made out so as to investigate against the petitioners for the offence under Section 494 of IPC. As this Court is of the view that the contents of the complaint do not attract the provisions under Sections 498-A and 494 of IPC so far as the petitioners are concerned, if investigation is allowed to go on, it will be gross abuse of the process. For the aforesaid reasons, this criminal petition is allowed and the proceedings initiated in Crime No.469 of 2010 on the file of the Central Crime Station, Hyderabad, are hereby quashed so far as the petitioners herein are concerned. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 16th November 2011 ajr