Telangana High Court
K.Anjaneyulu And 5 Others vs The State Of Telangana, Rep By P.P ... on 4 October, 2023
Bench: K.Surender
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No.8053 OF 2017
O R D E R:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the petitioners/Accused Nos.
1 to 6 to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.
276 of 2017 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First
Class, Narayanpet. The offences alleged against the petitioners
are under Sections 494, 498-A of Indian Penal Code and Sections
3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to
6 and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for
respondent No.1-State. Perused the record.
3. The 2nd respondent/de facto complainant filed a complaint
before Makthal Police on 08.03.2017 stating that she was
married to Accused No.1 in the year, 2000 in a Temple. At the
time of marriage, her parents gave Rs.l,00,000/- cash, three
thulas of gold and other household articles to the petitioners.
Thereafter, Accused No.1 started harassing her for additional
dowry. She gave birth to a female child and she has been staying
at her parents' house. However, she was not taken back from her
KS, J
parents' house from nearly one year. After one year, she was
taken back and the husband-Accused No.1 and other
petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 5 started harassing her demanding
additional dowry and she was sent out from the house in the year
2012. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant came
to know that Accused No.1 married to Accused No.6 while her
marriage was subsisting with Accused No.1. For the said reason,
she lodged a complaint requesting the Police to take appropriate
action. On the basis of the complaint, a charge-sheet was filed
for the offences punishable under Sections 494, 498 of I.P.C. and
Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
4. The complaint was admittedly given with a delay of five
years. According to the de facto complainant, she was necked
out of the house in the year, 2012 and she was staying at her
parents' house. No reasons are given as to why she has not
preferred any complaint against these petitioners for a period of
five years. In the complaint, it is stated that she came to know
that Accused No.1 married to Accused No.6 and thereafter, she
has filed the present complaint. To attract an offence under
Section 494 of I.P.C., a spouse shall marry another during the
subsistence of marriage. It is not the case that Accused No.6 was
KS, J
already married at the time when the alleged marriage with
Accused No.1 has taken place. As far as petitioner Nos.2 to 5 are
concerned only bald allegations were leveled that they were
responsible for sending out of the 2nd respondent from their
house in the year, 2012. The said vague and omnibus allegations
cannot be made basis for continuing criminal proceedings against
them for the offences under Section 498 of I.P.C. and Sections 3
and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, as per the Judgments of
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Kahkashan Kausar and
others vs. State of Bihar and others 1 and Preeti Gupta vs.
State of Jharkhand 2.
5. In view of the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the above said two Judgments, the proceedings against the
petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 5 in Calendar Case are liable to be
quashed, since vague and omnibus allegations are levelled
against them.
6. Further, since no offence is made out against Accused No.6
under Section 494 of I.P.C., this Court deems it appropriate to
quash all further proceedings against Accused No.6 in
(2022) 6 SCC 599
(2010) 7 SCC 667
KS, J
C.C.No.276 of 2017. However, the trial Court shall proceed
against Accused No.1.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed and the
proceedings against petitioner Nos.2 to 6/Accused Nos.2 to 6 in
C.C.No.276 of 2017 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate
of First Class, Narayanpet, are hereby quashed. Insofar as
petitioner No.1/Accused No.1 is concerned, the trial Court shall
proceed against him.
8. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, in this Criminal
Petition, shall stand closed.
_________________
K.SURENDER, J
Dt.04.10.2023
svl
