APHC010719322022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10550/2022 Between: 1. BANGARU LAKSHMI, W/O SATTI BABU AGED ABOUT 38 YRS, R/O D.NO.18-3-1, RAGAMPETA KAKINADA 2. KILARI VEERAMMA, W/O SIVA KUMAR AGED ABOUT 32 YRS, R/O D.NO.10-5-5, ADITHYA SCHOOL ROAD WATER TANK, CHINA RANGANI PALEM PUNTHA BHIMAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 3. GUDUPU VEERAMMA, W/O VENKANNA AGED ABOUT 60 YRS R/O D.NO.8-1-6/1, RELLI VEEDHI BALLA MARKET CENTRE, SAMALKOT TOWN WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 4. VARRI DURGA PRASAD, S/O RAMANA AGED ABOUT 28 YRS, R/O D.NO.18-13-76, RELLI VEEDHI RAGAMPETA, KAKINADA ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. GUDUPU SANDHYA RANI, GUDUPU SANDHYA RANI W/O SRINIVASA RAO AGED ABOUT 29 YRS, R/O GAYATHRI NAGAR KAKINADA TOWN 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. P NAGENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. KALEPU YASHWANTH 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.2, 3, 4 and 6, seeking to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.1549 of 2022 on the file of the Court of Special Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, 2 Kakinada, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 18601 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 19612. 2. Heard Sri V.Sai Harsha, learned counsel representing Sri P.Nagendra Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioners, Sri N.Mourya Singh, learned counsel representing Sri K.Yashwanth, learned counsel for Respondent No.2 and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1/State. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 are the paternal aunts and Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 and 6 are the distant relatives of Accused No.1. Learned counsel would further submit that the Petitioners have nothing to with the alleged offences and a false case has been lodged against the Petitioners. Learned counsel would further submit that, the allegations mentioned in the complaint, charge sheet and the statements of the witnesses recorded by the Police during investigation, do not disclose any offence against the Petitioners. Learned counsel would pray for quashment of the case against the Petitioners. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for Respondent No.2 opposed the petition and would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders so far as Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 and 6 are concerned. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor supported the version of Respondent No.2. 1 for short ‘IPC’ 2 for short ‘DP Act’ 3 6. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material placed on record, as rightly put by the learned counsel for the Petitioners, nothing is attributed against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 and 6 to attract either the offence under Section 498-A IPC or Sections 3 and 4 of the DP Act. In the absence of any prima facie allegations against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 and 6, continuation of criminal proceedings against them is mere abuse of process of law. 7. Coming to the case of the Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3, there are clear allegations made against them that Accused No.1 alleged to have illegal intimacy with them and they have intervened in the matrimonial life of Accused No.1 and Respondent No.2, due to which, Accused No.1 used to harass Respondent No.2 both physically and mentally. In the light of the same, this Court is of the view that, it is not a fit case for quashment against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3, since there is a verifiable material against them which has to be decided at full length of trial. 8. In the result, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed quashing the proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 and 6 in C.C.No.1549 of 2022 on the file of the Court of Special Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada. The petition against Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 is hereby dismissed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:11.02.2025 Dinesh 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.10550 of 2022 Dt.11.02.2025 Dinesh