1 CRLP No.269 OF 2023 APHC010015162023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 269/2023 Between: Rimmalapudi Sarvendranath ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. S LAKSHMI PRAMEELA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: 2 CRLP No.269 OF 2023 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION No.269 OF 2023 ORDER: 1. This Criminal petition, under Section 482 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, 1973, is filed seeking to quash the proceedings insofar as the petitioner/A.3 is concerned in C.C. No.1860 of 2022 pending on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Peddapuram, Kakinada District, . 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3. The petitioner was arraigned as A.3 in C.C.No.1860 of 2022 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial First-Class Magistrate, at Peddapuram, for alleged offenses under Sections 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘I.P.C.’) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the brother of A.1. It is further submitted that the marriage of A.1 with the 2nd respondent was performed on 26.05.2020. At the time of marriage, the petitioner worked as an Assistant Professor at Bangalore. On account of marital disputes, the 2nd respondent filed a complaint on 05.09.2022, implicating the petitioner as A.3. The police, after investigation, filed a charge sheet, which was subsequently taken on file by the learned Magistrate in C.C. No.1860 of 2022. 3 CRLP No.269 OF 2023 5. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has been working as an Assistant Professor at IIT Gauhati since the year 2022. It is further submitted that the petitioner never stayed with A.1 and the 2nd respondent at their marital home. Except for a vague reference to the petitioner in the complaint and the charge sheet, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner that would attract the penal provisions of Section 498-A of I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 6. The learned counsel further submits that the Court, while admitting the criminal petition, granted interim relief by dispensing with the presence of the petitioner in the C.C. 7. Notice was served on the 2nd respondent, but there was no representation for the 2nd respondent. Today also, none appeared for the 2nd respondent. 8. This court perused the statements of the listed witnesses. Except for the vague reference in the charge sheet and in the statement of L.W.1, there are no specific allegations against the petitioner. The other listed witnesses did not even refer to the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the alleged crime. 9. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and after perusing the record, this is another classic case where the relatives of the husband are roped in as accused for harassing them. On these grounds, this Court deems it appropriate to exercise the 4 CRLP No.269 OF 2023 jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.1860 of 2022 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate at Peddapuram, insofar as petitioner/A.3 is concerned. 10. Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed. 11. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this criminal petition shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Dt.10.04.2025 BV