Telangana High Court
Amgoth Raju Naik vs The State Of Telangana on 10 March, 2023
Bench: K.Surender
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.4836 & 10581 OF 2022
COMMON ORDER:
1. Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 6 in Criminal Petition No.4836
of 2022 and Petitioner/A1 in Criminal Petition No. 10581 of 2022
are the parents-in-law and husband respectively being prosecuted
in the same case, as such, both the petitions are being disposed of
by way of this Common Order.
2. It is the case of 2nd respondent that she was married to A1 on
18th March, 2017 at Kothagudem Town and at the time of marriage
Rs.24.00 lakhs worth stridhan was given. Immediately after
marriage the 2nd respondent noticed that the attitude of her
husband changed and every day he used to spend time with his
friends and come late in the night. When questioned, the husband
insisted that Rs.30.00 lakhs additional dowry should be given to
cohabit with her. On 3rd April, 2017 he left for Germany without
taking the 2nd respondent. Later the 2nd Respondent went to
Germany and joined A1. In Germany also the husband and the 2nd
respondent did not lead normal marital life, however on 3rd
December 2017, A1 beat the 2nd respondent, took her jewelry and
sent her to India.
3. Aggrieved by the harassment of her husband and in-laws
demanding additional dowry of Rs.30.00 lakhs, the 2nd respondent
filed a written complaint with the police on 26th February, 2021.
Having registered the said complaint, police concluded
investigation and filed charge sheet for the offences punishable
under Sections 498A, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections
3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit
that the 2nd respondent has filed for divorce and also case under
the DVC Act. There is material suppression of facts by the 2nd
respondent about the agreement that was entered into in between
A1 and the 2nd respondent on 25th December 2017. In accordance
with the said agreement Rs.32.00 lakhs was agreed to be given to
the 2nd respondent out of which an amount of Rs.15.00 lakhs were
deposited into the account of the 2nd respondent. Suppressing the
said issue and settlement in between the parties, false complaint
was made by the 2nd respondent only to harass the husband and
her in-laws. He relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajanlal [(1991) 2 SCJ
351].
5. On the other hand, it was argued on behalf of the 2nd
respondent that though there was an agreement, the petitioners
failed to adhere to the conditions of the agreement and since there
was continuous harassment both in India and also when she joined
the husband in Germany, proceedings cannot be quashed.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners filed the agreement dated
25th December 2017 and also proof of depositing Rs.15.00 lakhs
into complainant's account. The complaint filed under the DVC Act
and also the divorce petition are filed along with the material
papers. As seen from the petitions filed for the maintenance and
also divorce, the main allegation appears to be that the A1 is
impotent. The 2nd respondent requested the Family Court to grant
divorce on the basis of impotency of A1.
7. The 2nd respondent had deliberately suppressed the allegation
of
A-1 not able to lead a normal marital life for the reason of
impotency. Further the agreement that was entered into in between
the parties on 25th December 2017 and also taking an amount of
Rs.15.00 lakhs for the purpose of filing an application by the 2nd
respondent were suppressed. The main allegation in the DVC
complaint and also the divorce application filed by the 2nd
respondent is that A1 was impotent and the marriage never
consummated. The differences that arose in between the spouses
was for the reason of the alleged impotency of A1. The said fact is
also suppressed by the 2nd respondent in the complaint and the
investigation does not reveal that it was mentioned either by the 2nd
respondent or any of the relatives of the 2nd respondent that A1 was
impotent. However the criminal complaint reads that for the reason
of demand of Rs.30.00 lakhs additional dowry, A1 did not lead
marital life with the 2nd respondent. Both the versions are
contradictory. Except stating that demand of Rs.30.00 lakhs was
made by petitioners in India and also in Germany, there is no other
allegation.
8. As claimed by the 2nd respondent, if the main allegation is
impotecy of A1, unable to lead normal life with the 2nd respondent,
the question of demanding additional dowry of Rs.30.00 lakhs is
highly improbable. Further, the agreement which was entered into
on 25.12.2017 specifically states that A1 cannot perform sexual
acts. It is further mentioned that both the parties have agreed to
cancel their marriage and obtain divorce. There are seven
witnesses who are parties to the said agreement. As already stated
when the parties have determined to end their marriage and the 2nd
respondent accepting an amount of Rs.32.00 lakhs as permanent
alimony and having received part of the amount, the allegation that
the petitioners were harassing her for additional dowry of Rs.30.00
lakhs cannot be believed.
9. Both for the reasons of suppressing material facts in the
complainant and also the improbability of the allegations made in
the complaint regarding demand of additional dowry, this Court
deems it appropriate to quash the proceedings. However, it is
informed to the Court that the remaining balance in accordance
with the MOU entered to in between the parties would be paid. The
said aspect is also considered by this Court. Learned counsel for
the petitioner would submit that the remaining balance would be
paid within a period of eight weeks.
10. In the result, the proceedings against the petitioners/A1 to A6
in C.C.No.807 of 2021 on the file of III Additional Judicial First
Class Magistrate, Kothagudem, are hereby quashed.
11. Accordingly, both the Criminal Petitions are allowed.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date: 10.03.2023
kvs
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
Crl.P.Nos.4836 and 10581 of 2022
Dated: 10.03.2023
kvs
