APHC010629912023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3327] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9890/2023 Between: 1. PAINAM SUNITHA, W/O RATNA RAJU. AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC- ADVOCATE (MENTIONED IN CHARGE SHEET AS COOLI), 2. PAINAM RATHAN RAJU, S/O RAJA RATNAM, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC- ADVOCATE, (MENTIONED IN CHARGE SHEET AS COOLI ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) A N D 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. HIGH COURT OF A.P. AMARAVATI. 2. PAINAM MANISHA PRIYA YADAV, 2. W/O P. KARTHIK, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCC- DENTAL DOCOTR, R/O 2-1- 1/1/2, DR. CHARI LANE, OPPOSITE YELLAMMA TEMPLE, NALLAKUNTA, HYDERABAD. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to grant stay of ail further proceedings in CC No. 528 of 2023 on the file of the Hon'ble II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Eluru, West Godavari District including the appearance of the petitioners/Accused-2 & 3 till the disposal of the Main Quash Petition in the interest of the justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to 'grant stay of -all SRK, J Crl.P.No.9890 of 2023 2 further proceedings in CC No. 528 of 2023 on the file of the Aon'We.II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Eluru, West Godavari District Thcluding the / appearance of the petitioners/Accused 2 & 3 till the disposal of the Main Quash Petition in the interest of the justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. UDAY KUMAR VAMPUGADAVALA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. T V L NARASIMHA RAO 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: SRK, J Crl.P.No.9890 of 2023 3 O R D E R This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘CrPC’) has been filed by the petitioners/ Accused Nos.2 and 3, to quash the charge sheet in Calendar Case No.528 of 2023 pending on the file of the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Eluru of West Godavari District, arising out of a case in Crime No.277 of 2023 of Eluru II Town Police Station, registered against the petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 and other accused, for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity ‘IPC’) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for brevity ‘the DP Act, 1961’). 2. The allegations levelled as against the accused Nos.1 to 3 in the charge sheet, in brief, are that accused No.1 is the husband of respondent No.2/de facto complainant, accused Nos.2 and 3 are the parents of accused No.1. (b) The marriage of respondent No.2/de facto complainant was solemnized with accused No.1 on 03.04.2017 without the consent of her parents; that for sometime after the marriage, respondent No.2/de facto complainant and accused No.1 led happy matrimonial life and her in-laws also looked after her well; that at the beginning of her marriage, accused Nos.2 and 3 told the respondent No.2/de facto SRK, J Crl.P.No.9890 of 2023 4 complainant that they would allow her to study MDS, but six months after the marriage, they stopped her studies and pressurized her to do job; that when the respondent No.2/de facto complainant questioned accused No.1, she was beaten by A1 in a drunken condition; that later respondent No.2/de facto complainant got job as a Duty Doctor in Prabha Hospital situated at Eluru, but all her earnings were taken away by A1; that A1 took the chit amount of Rs.1.00 lakh subscribed by respondent No.2/de facto complainant, and gave it to accused No.2, and when the same was questioned, respondent No.2/de facto complainant was beaten on 25.04.2023 in front of A2 and A3 and in turn, A2 and A3 locked the respondent No.2/de facto complainant in a room; that when the respondent No.2/de facto complainant ran away from there and went to bus station, A2 and A3 were alleged to have started quarrelling with respondent No.2/de facto complainant, due to which, she returned to her marital home; that again on 29.04.2023, the respondent No.2/de facto complainant left the conjugal home without intimating to anyone. The case was reported to police on 10.08.2023 and a case in Crime No.277 of 2023 of Eluru II Town Police Station was registered for the aforesaid offences. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer filed Charge Sheet. SRK, J Crl.P.No.9890 of 2023 5 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners/A2 and A3 would contend that the petitioners/A2 and A3, who are parents of A1 were falsely implicated into the subject crime and they never demanded the respondent No.2/de facto complainant to bring dowry. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners/A2 and A3 that when the father of respondent No.2/de facto complainant was proposed to perform her marriage with another person, respondent No.2/de facto complainant, who is schoolmate of A1, compelled and threatened A1 to marry her. Learned counsel would further contend that the father of respondent No.2/de facto complainant had another wife and he kept all the properties in her name and in order to get back those properties, respondent No.2/de facto complainant was alleged to have left the company of A1 on 29.04.2023, and later switched off her phone. According to learned counsel, the petitioners/A2 and A3 are unaware of the marriage between A1 and respondent No.2/de facto complainant and they came to know about the same after their marriage and they lived separately for more than six years and therefore, there is no scope of harassing the respondent No.2/de facto complainant for dowry. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2/de facto complainant would contend that petitioners/A2 and A3 harassed the SRK, J Crl.P.No.9890 of 2023 6 respondent No.2/de facto complainant physically and mentally and demanded her to bring dowry. It is further contended that the chit amount of Rs.1.00 lakh subscribed by respondent No.2/de facto complainant out of her salary savings, was taken away by A1 and gave it to A2 and when it was questioned, petitioners/A2 and A3 locked the respondent No.2/de facto complainant in a room. Learned counsel would further contend that there are specific allegations as against petitioners/A2 and A3 and they are disputed questions of fact and the same have to be adjudicated during the course of trial and in a petition filed under Section 482 CrPC, these disputes questions of fact cannot be gone into by this Court and it is for the trial Court to decide the same. Hence, it is prayed to dismiss the Criminal Petition. 5. Learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State/respondent No.1 concurred with the submissions made by respondent No.2/de facto complainant and prayed to dismiss the Criminal Petition. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners/A2 and A3, learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor for State representing respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent No.2/de facto complainant. Perused the material available on record. SRK, J Crl.P.No.9890 of 2023 7 7. There cannot be any dispute that inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 CrPC can be exercised to prevent abuse of process of Court or to give effect to any order under the Code or to secure the ends of justice. This Court is also conscious of the fact that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases and that the Court would not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the report. On this aspect, it is pertinent to refer to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex court in State of Haryana v. Ch.Bhajanlal and Ors.1, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court held as under: “In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelized and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. 1 AIR 1992 SC 604 SRK, J Crl.P.No.9890 of 2023 8 (1) where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused; (2) where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156 (1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155 (2) of the Code; (3) where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or 'complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused; (4) where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155 (2) of the Code; (5) where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused; (6) where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party; (7) where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” SRK, J Crl.P.No.9890 of 2023 9 8. The essential ingredients, in order to prove an offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC, are that a married woman must be subject to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives. Under explanation to the aforesaid section, any willful conduct which is likely to drive a woman to commit suicide or cause grave injury or danger to her life etc. or harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand. The marriage must be valid, and the complaint cannot be based on vague or general allegations. This implies that any deliberate action or behaviour by the husband or his relatives that leads to severe mental or physical harm to the woman falls under the purview of cruelty. Sections 3 and 4 of the DP Act, 1961 criminalize giving, taking or demanding dowry. Section 3 of the DP Act, 1961 covers the actual exchange of dowry, while Section 4 of the DP Act, 1961 covers direct or indirect demands for dowry. The essential ingredients to prove these offences are a specific demand or exchange of money/property. 9. There is no dispute with regard to the relationship between both parties i.e. petitioners/A2 and A3 and respondent No.2/de facto complainant. It is also an admitted fact that pursuant to the report filed SRK, J Crl.P.No.9890 of 2023 10 by respondent No.2/de facto complainant, a case in Crime No. 0-2/2023 of Nallakunta Police Station was registered for the aforesaid offences, and later the said FIR was transferred to Eluru II Town Police Station vide Crime No.277 of 2023. 10. This Court perused the contents of the report filed by the respondent No.2/de facto complainant coupled with the statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC, which go to show that subsequent to marriage, the respondent No.2/de facto complainant was not allowed to go out from the conjugal home and she was not given her phone also. It further discloses that the respondent No.2/de facto complainant was pressurized to do job and when she got job as a Duty Doctor in Prabha Hospital at Eluru, all her earnings were taken away by A1 and the petitioners/A2 and A3. There is a specific allegation as against the petitioners/A2 and A3 that when A1 learnt about saving of salary amount of respondent No.2/de facto complainant in a chit subscribed by her, he took the said chit amount and gave it to A2, and when respondent No.2/de facto complainant questioned the said act, the petitioners/A2 and A3 were alleged to have locked her in a room. Later, when she escaped from their clutches, and went to bus stand, A1 and A3 were alleged to have taken her to the conjugal home. SRK, J Crl.P.No.9890 of 2023 11 11. A perusal of the entire material on record goes to show that there are specific accusations made as against the petitioners/A2 and A3 that they demanded the respondent No.2/de facto complainant to bring dowry from her parents. Though, the learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 denied all the material allegations that were made in the charge sheet about demanding respondent No.2/ de facto complainant to bring dowry from her parents and contrary, it was alleged by the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 that the respondent No.2/de facto complainant compelled and threatened A1 to marry her without the consent of her father, this Court is of the considered view that they are all disputed questions of fact, which have to be adjudicated only after conducting full-fledged trial, and this Court, in a petition filed under Section 482 CrPC, would not be in a position to conduct a roving inquiry into those disputed questions of fact and quash the proceedings at this stage. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3. 12. As regards the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 with regard to dispensing with the presence of the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 before the trial Court, this Court does not find any ground to dispense with the presence of SRK, J Crl.P.No.9890 of 2023 12 2nd petitioner, who is accused No.3 in the subject Calendar Case. However, insofar as accused No.2 is concerned, the presence of accused No.2 before the trial Court is dispensed with, except on those dates when the trial Court feels that her presence is necessary. 13. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY 21st April, 2026. DNB