Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sri Tarimala Chalapathi, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 11 November, 2022
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.2714 of 2022
ORDER:
The petitioners are accused Nos.2 to 4 in C.C.No.307 of
2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Guntakal for the offences under Sections 498-A and 506 r/w 34
of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. The petitioners have filed the present criminal
petition for quashing the said charge sheet.
3. The allegations in the charge sheet are; that dowry
was demanded and received by the petitioners along with
accused No.1, at the time of the marriage solemnized on
20.04.2016; the de facto complaint/respondent No.2 was
harassed and tortured by the petitioners on various occasions
by referring to her fairness in colour and by complaining that
further dowry should be given by the parents of the de facto
complainant; the petitioners had supported accused
No.1/husband, when the de facto complainant had found video
call between accused No.1/husband and another lady and the
de facto complainant was told to accept the extra marital affairs
of the husband; the further demands for dowry were made when
Srimantham function for the de facto complainant was to be
held in 2018; the petitioners along with accused No.1/husband
came to the house of the de facto complainant on 29.12.2018
and raised a quarrel with the parents of the de facto
complainant, asking for 1/3rd share in the property of the
parents of the de facto complainant, failing which they would
take away the new born baby with them.
4. The petitioners contend that these allegations are
general and omnibus allegations made against the petitioners
and that the said allegations do not make out a case under
Section 498-A of I.P.C.
5. Sri G.Ramesh Babu learned counsel, appearing for
the de facto complainant/respondent No.2 would submit that
the allegations are specific and clearly make out a case against
the petitioners. He would submit that the veracity of these
claims would have to be tested in a proper trial and the same
cannot be raised by the petitioners before this Court exercising a
jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
6. A perusal of the allegations in the charge sheet as
well as the complaint given by the de facto complainant would
show that there are no further allegations apart from the above
allegations referred in this order. These allegations are general
and omnibus allegations being made against the petitioners and
more specifically the 3rd petitioner herein.
7. In view of the Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Preeti Gupta vs. State of Jharkhand1 and
Kahkashan Kausar and Ors. Vs. State of Bihar and Ors., 2 the
said allegations against the 3rd petitioner would not clearly make
out a case against the 3rd petitioner. Further, the petitioners
have produced the birth certificate of the 3rd petitioner showing
that the 3rd petitioner was born in the year 2000 which would
mean that she was when 16 years old, she is said to be
demanded dowry from the parents of the de facto complainant
and she was 18 years old when she is said to have harassed the
de facto complainant for dowry. The version of the complaint
against the 3rd petitioner, sounds highly improbable.
8. For all these reasons, the C.C.No.307 of 2019 on the
file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Guntakal is quashed
against the 3rd petitioner.
9. As far as petitioners 1 and 2 are concerned, this
Court, at the time of the admission of the petition had dispensed
with the presence of the petitioners in the trial of the matter. It
would suffice to give the same relief to the petitioners 1 and 2.
10. Accordingly, this criminal petition is allowed and
quashing the C.C.No.307 of 2019 on the file of Judicial
(2010) 7 SCC 667
(2022) 6 SCC 599
Magistrate of First Class, Guntakal against the 3rd petitioner and
dispensing with the presence of the petitioners 1 and 2 in
C.C.No.307 of 2019 except when their presence is necessary for
examination or for any other mandatory purpose.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall
stand closed.
____________________________
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.
11.11.2022
RJS
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.2714 of 2022
11.11.2022
RJS
