Telangana High Court
Smt. K.Sreethi Reddy vs The Sate Of Telangana on 25 October, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.347 & 553 OF 2024
COMMON ORDER:
Since the issue involved in both the criminal petitions is
one and the same, they are being heard and disposed of
together by way of this common order.
2. These Criminal Petitions are filed by the
petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4, respectively, under Section
482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') to
quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.319 of 2023
of Gadwal Town Police Station, Jogulamba Gadwal District,
registered for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and Sections 3
and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short 'DP Act').
3. The brief facts of the cases are that respondent
No.2/de facto complainant lodged a complaint against the
petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 before the Police, stating that
she married accused No.1 on 14.12.2022, and got dowry of 51
thulas of gold and 3 kg of silver from her parents. Initially,
SKS,J
Crl.P.Nos.347 & 553 of 2024
they lived harmoniously for two months, but later accused
Nos.2 to 4 began to harass her claiming that her parents
provided insufficient dowry and also restricted her
communication with her family. It is further stated that
accused No.1 pressurized her to take insurance on her plot,
mentioning himself as nominee, and later demanded her to
sell the plot to fund his needs. Thereafter, when she was
conceived and fell sick, accused Nos.1 to 4 did not take care of
her and after a while they got the child aborted, due to which
she suffered back pain and requested a separate residence,
but her husband insisted her to pay rent using the money of
her parents. On 08.11.20233, accused No.1 had physically
and verbally abused her, leading her to leave the house of her
in-laws, where her certificates, 51 thulas of gold, and 3 kg of
silver remained. Basing on the said complaint, the Police
registered a case in Crime No.319 of 2023, for the offences
punishable under Section 498-A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4
of DP Act. Hence, the present criminal petitions are filed.
4. Heard Sri J.Venudhar Reddy, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Sri D. Arun Kumar,
learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of
SKS,J
Crl.P.Nos.347 & 553 of 2024
respondent No.1 and Sri K. Rathanga Pani Reddy, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that on
28.12.2023 respondent No.2 accompanied by family members
and seven others had allegedly stormed the house of the
petitioners, ransacked it, stole valuables and physically
abused them and despite reporting the same to police, no FIR
was registered until the mother of respondent No.2 lodged a
complaint against the sister and brother-in-law of respondent
No.2, and the same was registered as Crime No.401 of 2023.
He further submitted that after registering the case against
the sister and brother-in-law of respondent No.2, a counter
case in Gadwal was filed, unfairly implicating the sister of
accused No.1. He further submitted that the incident
occurred in Nagole and not in Gadwal, as such, the Gadwal
Police has no jurisdiction to register the case. Further,
accused No.4 is married and had been living with her family
separately since the last 10 years, as such, she is no way
concerned with the alleged incidents. He further submitted
that petitioner No.1 has to take care of his parents i.e.,
accused Nos.2 and 3. Therefore, the allegations leveled
SKS,J
Crl.P.Nos.347 & 553 of 2024
against the petitioner are vague and baseless and the
proceedings against them are liable to be quashed.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of respondent No.2 opposed the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the petitioners stating that the allegations
leveled against the petitioners are serious in nature as they
harassed respondent No.2 and also did not take care of her
during her pregnancy and thereafter forced her for abortion
due to which she had been suffering from back pain. He
further submitted that the investigation in the case is not yet
completed, as such, quashing of proceedings at this stage
does not arise. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the
criminal petitions.
7. In the light of the submissions made by both the parties
and a perusal of the material available on record, it appears
that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are that
they harassed respondent No.2 and demanded additional
dowry. It is primarily contended by the learned counsel for
the petitioners that accused No.4 is not residing with accused
No.1 and respondent No.2 ; and secondly, that except
SKS,J
Crl.P.Nos.347 & 553 of 2024
supporting accused No.1 and his parents, she never interfered
with the matrimonial disputes between them. It is noted that
the accused Nos.2 and 3 are the parents of accused No.1. The
allegations against them are that they supported accused
No.1. It is noted that they are senior citizens, suffering with
serious old age ailments.
8. At this stage, it is imperative to note the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Achin Gupta vs. State of
Haryana and another 1 , wherein in paragraph No.35, it is
held as under:
"35. In one of the recent pronouncements
of this Court in Mahmood Ali and Ors vs.
State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors., 2023 SCC
OnLine SC 950, authored by one of us (J.B.
Pardiwala, j.), the legal principle applicable
apropos Section 482 of the Cr.P.C was
examined. Therein, it was observed that
when an accused comes before the High
Court, invoking either the inherent power
under Section 482 Cr.P.c or the extraordinary
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution, to get the FIR or the criminal
proceedings quashed, essentially on the
ground that such proceedings are manifestly
frivolous or vexatious or instituted with the
Criminal Appeal No. 2379 of 2024
SKS,J
Crl.P.Nos.347 & 553 of 2024
ulterior motive of wreaking vengeance, then
in such circumstances, the High Court owes
a duty to look into the FIR with care and a
little more closely. It was further observed
that it will not be enough for the Court to look
into the averments made in the
FIR/complaint alone for the purpose of
ascertaining whether the necessary
ingredients to constitute the alleged offence
are disclosed or not as, in frivolous or
vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty
to look into many other attending
circumstances emerging from the record of
the case over and above the averments and, if
need be, with due care and circumspection,
to try and read between the lines."
9. As observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Achin
Gupta (supra), the averments in the complaint has to disclose
the alleged ingredients of the offences. In the present case,
except omnibus allegations, there are no other specific
allegations against accused Nos.2 to 4, who are the parents
and sister of accused No.1. Further, the Hon'ble Apex Court
in Preeti Gupta vs. State of Jharkhand 2, has observed that
the family members, who are residing away from accused
No.1, cannot be roped into the case. In the present case, the
allegations against accused Nos.2 to 4 are that they instigated
(2010) 7 SCC 667
SKS,J
Crl.P.Nos.347 & 553 of 2024
accused No.1 to demand additional dowry and also harassed
her physically and mentally. Except these bald allegations,
there are no specific allegations against accused Nos.2 to 4.
In view thereof, as accused No.4 is not residing along with
accused No.1, the allegations against her are considered to be
vague. Further, accused Nos.2 and 3 are the parents of
accused No.1, they are senior citizens and suffering with old
age ailments, the proceedings against them are liable to be
quashed. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that
even if the trial is conducted, no purpose would be served and
that since there are no other specific allegations against
accused Nos.2 to 4, the proceedings against them are liable to
be quashed.
10. That apart, there are specific allegations against
accused No.1 as he harassed respondent No.2 and did not
take care of her during her pregnancy and the same leads to
her abortion. Since there are serious allegations against
accused No.1, it needs further investigation. Therefore, the
proceedings against accused No.1 are liable to be dismissed.
SKS,J
Crl.P.Nos.347 & 553 of 2024
11. In the result, Criminal Petition No.347 of 2024 is
allowed and the proceedings initiated against the
petitioner/accused No.4 in Crime No.319 of 2023 of Gadwal
Town Police Station, Jogulamba Gadwal District, are hereby
quashed.
12. Criminal Petition No.553 of 2024 is allowed-in-part and
the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3
in Crime No.319 of 2023 of Gadwal Town Police Station,
Jogulamba Gadwal District, are hereby quashed while
permitting the prosecution to proceed further against accused
No.1.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand
closed.
_______________
K. SUJANA, J
Date: 25.10.2024
PT
