IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8563 OF 2023 Between: 1. Bojanapalli Naga Srikanth, S/o.Srinivasulu, Chebrolu Village, Guntur Dt., 2. Bojanapalli Sathyavathi, W/o. Srinivasulu, Guntur Town and District. 3. Bojanapalli Srinivasulu, (diedf “ 4. Bojanapalli Narendra Babu, S/o.Radha Krishna Murthy. Hindu, aged-50 years, Chebrolu Village, Guntru Dt., 5. Bojanapalli Nageswari Devi, W/o.Narendra years, Chebrolu Village and Mandal, Guntur District. 6. SivaLeela, W/o. Mopidevi Rosaiah, Aged 65 and mandal Guntur District. Hindu, aged 32 years Hindu, Aged 50 years. Babu, Hindu , aged 45 years, Chebrolu Village ...PETITIONER / ACCUSED 1 & 6 AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, of Andra Pradesh,Amaravathi. 2. Bojanapalli Audi Lakshmi, W/o.Naga Srikanth Pathuru, Ulavapadu Village and Mandal, Prakasam High Court Hindu, Aged 30 years, ; Dt., ...Respondent / Complainants Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to quash the proceedings in Charge sheet No. 1438/2022 registered under offences of Section 498-Ar/w. 34 of I.P.C. and 3and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act on the file of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kandukur. / / I.A. NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C 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 further proceedings in pursuant to the proceedings in C.C. No. 1438/2021-on the file of Hon'ble Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kandukur. This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri B Ashok Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public Prosecutor behalf of the Respondent No.1 and M/s. Ayesha Azma SAdvocate for the Respondent No.2. on The Court made the following ORDER 1 APHC010529072023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] 3i--yL^ WEDNESDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8563/2023 Between: Bojanapalli Naga Srikanth and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) and Others Counsel for the Petitloner/accused(S): 1.B ASHOK KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2.AYESHAAZMAS The Court made the following order: The petitioners are arraigned as Accused Nos.1 to 6 in C.C.No.1438 of 2022 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kandukur. The 1®‘ petitioner is the husband of the 2"'^ respondent. The 2'"’^ petitioner is the mother of the 1®‘ petitioner. The 3 petitioner is the father of the 1®* petitioner and he passed 2 away during the pendency of investigation. The petitioner is the Accused No.1 father’s brother. The S'*" petitioner is the wife of 4*'" petitioner. The 6*^ petitioner is the sister of Accused No.Ts father. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though there are no specific allegations against the petitioner Nos.2 to 6. The learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against all the accused and issued summons. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the extended family of the Accused is arraigned as accused in the case only to harass the petitioners. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the marriage accused and 2"^ respondent was performed on 27.04.2018. It is submitted that the 2"^^ respondent left the company of the petitioner on 06.11.2019 and thereafter on 21.12.2020 she filed a complaint alleging offences under Section 498-A read with 34 IPC, Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. between the 1 The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that except for vague and bald allegations there are no specific allegations which would attract the penal consequences of Section 498-A, Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. It is also submitted that the 1®* petitioner is filed FCOP.No.666 of 2023 on the file of Principal Family Court-Cum-IV Additional District Court at Vijayawada, and 3. 3 inspite of service of notice on the respondent, the 2"^ respondent choose not to appear and the petitioners for dissolution of marriage was allowed by the Court. The marriage between the 1®' petitioner respondent dated 27.04.2018 stood dissolved as on 27.07.2023. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits nd and 2 that even on the face of the complaint or considering the statements of the listed witnesses, the alleged offence under Section 498-A Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act cannot be attributed to the petitioners. The learned counsel appearing for the 2'^'^ respondent submits that there are specific allegations of harassment and demand for 4. dowry and statement of LW-1 would suffice to substantiate the allegations. It is also submitted that there was a demand for dowry made by the petitioner and that the 1®* petitioner had harass the 2^"^ respondent during her stay with him both mentally and physically. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned 5. Assistant Public Prosecutor. Considering the nature of the allegations levelled against the 6. petitioners, the statements of the listed witnesses also do not speak about involvement of the petitioner Nos.2 to 6. Except for a vague nd reference of the petitioner Nos. 4 to 6 on their visits to the 2 4 respondent house, they were supporting the 1®' accused in his illegal demands. Such vague allegations without further specific details in the 161 Cr.P.C., statements made before the Police would definitely not attract the penal provision of Section 498-A against the petitioner Nos.2, 4, 5 and 6. 7. The trend of implicating the extended family of the husband to settle scores with the estranged husband by the de-facto complainants in cases registered under Section 498-A and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act has been steadily increasing. On the facts in the present case, the 2'"'' respondent is aware of the divorce granted by the Family Court and has not taken any steps for either filing an appeal or an application seeking to set aside the ex-parte divorce. 8. On enquiry, the learned counsel for the 2'"'^ respondent also submits that the 2""* respondent has not taken any steps to set aside the ex-parte order or filed any appeal against the decree of divorce, thereby accepting the divorce from the 1^‘ petitioner. 9. In these facts and circumstances, in the absence of any specific allegations against petitioners Nos. 2, 4, 5, and 6, the further proceedings against them in C.C. No. 1438 of 2022 would amount to harassment to the petitioners and they need not undergo the rigours " r 5 of trial without any specific allegations against them. On these grounds, this Court is of the considered opinion that the / C.C.No.1438 of 2022 on the file Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class Magistrate , Kandukur, is hereby quashed against the Petitioner Nos.2, 4, 5 and 6 (petitioner No.3 passed away) proceedings against Accused No.1 may go on. Accordingly, the present Criminal Petition is allowed in part. 10. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- G.HELA NAIDU assistant registrar //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kandukur. Ulavapadu police Station, Prakasam 1. The Additional 2. The Station House Officer, District. 3. One CC to Sri B Ashok Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] M/s Ayesha Azma S, Advocate [OPUC] Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at 4. OneCCto 5. Two CCs to the Public Amaravathi [OUT] 6. three CD COPIES PR TAG HIGH COURT DATED: 19/03/2025 \ \ ORDER CRLP.No.8563 of 2023 = 2 5 MAH 2025 . Current Section . ^ O ■y ALLOWING THE CRLP IN PART