APHC010211972022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3235/2022 Between: 1. MOPUR SANDEEP, S/O MOPUR PRASAD, AGED 32 YRS , CASTE. VELAMA , OCC. SOFTWARE EMPLOYEE R/O D.NO.9-32/24 ,HYDERSHAKOTA, HYDERABAD 2. MOPUR PRASAD, S/O LATE SANDDRAMAIAH AGED 62YRS , CASTE.VELAMA, OCC. RTD BSNL EMPLOYEE R/O D.NO.9-32/24 ,BHARATHI NILAYAM, HYDERSHAKOTA, HYDERABAD 3. MOPUR BHARATHI, W/O MOPUR PRASAD AGED 58YRS, CASTE. VELAMA ,OCC. HOUSE WIFE R/O D.NO.9-32/24 ,BHARATHI NILAYAM HYDERSHAKOTA, HYDERABAD ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF A.P. 2. IMMANENI HEMA MADHURI, D/O TULASIRAO AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE R/O D.NO. 10/233, ANKALAVARI VEEDI, BALARAMUNIPET, MACHILIPATNAM ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. LAKSHMIKANTH REDDY DESAI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. O UDAYA KUMAR 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731 has been filed, by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3, seeking quashment of the proceedings against them in C.C.No.1255 of 2020 1 in short ‘Cr.P.C.’ 2 on the file of the Court of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Machilipatnam for the offences under Sections 498-A of Indian Penal Code2 and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 19613. 2. Heard Sri Lakshmikanth Reddy Desai, learned counsel for the Petitioners, Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1/State and Sri O.Udaya Kumar, learned counsel for Respondent No.2. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the Petitioners herein are Accused Nos.1 to 3, who are husband and parents-in-law of Respondent No.2. Learned counsel would further submit that Accused No.1 filed Marriage O.P.No.6 of 2020 on the file of the Court of II Additional District Judge, Nalgonda at Suryapet and obtained decree of divorce dated 07.12.2021. Learned counsel would submit that the daughter of Accused No.1 stays with the father. It is submitted that, absolutely there are no specific allegations made against Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 to continue the criminal proceedings against them. Learned counsel would further submit that the Guardian O.P, Petition for restitution of conjugal rights, Maintenance Case and DVC filed by Respondent No.2 were dismissed for non-prosecution. Therefore, continuation of criminal proceedings against the Petitioners is an abuse of process of law and prays to allow the petition by quashing the same. 4. Learned counsel for Respondent No.2 vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that Respondent No.2 was necked out from the house by 2 in short ‘IPC; 3 in short ‘DP Act’ 3 keeping the child with the family of the Petitioners. Learned counsel would further submit that, as can be seen from the complaint and also the statement of Respondent No.2, the Petitioners and Respondent No.2 used to reside as one family. Learned counsel finally submits that there are allegations made against the Petitioners to continue the proceedings against them for the alleged offences. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor supported the version of Respondent No.2. 6. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the contents of the complaint, as rightly put by the learned counsel for Respondent No.2, verifiable material which requires investigation at full length of trial is present in this matter. In that view, it is not a fit case for quashment. However, learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that they have filed petitions for discharge and the same are pending before the trial Court. 7. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the Petitioners are at liberty to pursue their petitions filed before the trial Court for discharge. The Petitioners can raise their contentions before the trial in their defence and the learned trial Judge may appreciate and take appropriate decision according to law. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:03.01.2025 Dinesh 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.3235 of 2022 Dt.03.01.2025 Dinesh