APHC010110762020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1438/2020 Between: G Savaaraiah and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. P V N KIRAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR The Court made the following: 2 VS,J Crlp_1438_2020 ORDER: This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short “Cr.P.C.”) to quash the proceedings in F.I.R.No.7 of 2020 on the file of Woman Police Station, Tirupathi Urban, Chittoor District against the accused Nos.2 to 6 for the offences punishable under Section 498-A, 315, 328, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of D.P. Act read with 156(3) of Cr.P.C. 2. The petitioner Nos.1 to 5 herein are accused Nos. 2 to 6 respectively and the 2nd respondent is the defacto complainant. The 2nd respondent has submitted a complaint against the accused on the file of IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class Court, Tirupati stating that the accused No.1 is her husband; 2nd and 3rd accused are her in-laws i.e. the parents of the accused No.1; accused no.4 is the daughter of the accused Nos.2 and 3 and sister of the accused No.1; accused No.5 is the husband of accused No.4; accused No.6 is the sister of accused No.3. It is further stated that the 2nd respondent is a MBBS graduate and a doctor by profession. After completion of the said course, the 2nd respondent secured a job as Medical Officer in Apollo Hospital, Aragonda near Chittoor and at that time, her marriage was fixed to be performed with the accused No.1 who was pursuing diploma in Orthopedic at CMC, Vellore. It is further stated that the 2nd respondent is a Hindu and that the accused are professing Christianity. As such, the marriage of the 2nd respondent and the 1st accused was performed at St.Paul CSI Church, Pakala, Chittoor district as per Christian religious customs. For the said marriage, the parents of the 2nd respondent have given Rs.25,00,000/- in cash, 50 soverigns of gold, silver articles weighing five kilograms, house hold articles worth Rs.2,00,000/- to the accused towards dowry. After the marriage, the 2nd respondent has joined the 1st accused to lead a happy marital life at the marital home in Tirupati, wherein all the accused other than the in-laws used to visit frequently. 3 VS,J Crlp_1438_2020 3. While so, the 1st accused has started harassing the 2nd respondent for giving less dowry and the same was supported by the parents and sister of the 1st accused. The 2nd respondent was beat by the 1st accused and the parents of the 1st accused have warned the 2nd respondent not to sit before them and have made the 2nd respondent to sit on the floor. The 2nd respondent was tortured by the accused Nos.1 to 5 physically and mentally and that the accused No.1 has harassed the 2nd respondent sexually. It is further stated in the complaint that the accused No.1 took the 2nd respondent to quarters in CMC, Vellore on 03.01.2019 as the 1st accused has secured seat pertaining to Diploma in Orthopedic, wherein the 2nd respondent was tortured physically and mentally at the instance of the rest of the accused. The 1st accused started suspecting the character of the 2nd respondent and has directed the 2nd respondent not to talk to any of the neighbours. The 1st accused has also beat the 2nd respondent on the streets alleging that she has seen a stranger and the 1st accused has also scolded the 2nd respondent on several occasions using unprintable language. When the 2nd respondent has questioned the 1st accused whether he is having an illegal affair with one Mahi Jayanthi, the 2nd respondent was mercilessly beaten and when the same was informed by the parents of the 2nd respondent to the parents of 1st accused, they have supported the illegal acts of the 1st accused. It is further stated that the accused Nos.4 and 5 have harassed the 2nd respondent for not bringing enough dowry as per their expectations and that the accused Nos.2 to 6 have regularly visited the quarters of the 1st accused and have started harassing the 2nd respondent for additional dowry of Rs.70,00,000/- and that they have also forced to sell the house site situated at Upparapalli which is owned by the father of the 2nd respondent. For refusing to do the same, the 2nd respondent was beaten by the 1st accused which was also supported by accused Nos.2 to 4 and 6. 4 VS,J Crlp_1438_2020 4. It is further stated in the complaint that the 1st accused used to take nude photos of the 2nd respondent while she was changing her dress and has threatened to post the same on social media and further forced to give additional dowry of Rs.70,00,000/-. During that period, the 2nd respondent was pregnant and the accused Nos.1 to 5 have forced the 2nd respondent to abort the baby, for refusing the same, the accused No.1 beat the 2nd respondent which led to miscarriage. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent came to know that the 1st accused has married one Asha Jyothi earlier and that they have obtained divorce, which fact was suppressed by the accused. In the month of August, 2019, the 2nd respondent was again pregnant and upon informing the same to the accused, the 2nd respondent was forced to go for abortion, as the same was refused by the 2nd respondent, the 1st accused directed the 2nd respondent to leave the house. In the month of December, 2019, the 2nd respondent was informed that she is suffering from Hepatitis-B disease and subsequently, it was proved that the 1st accused at the instance of accused Nos.2 to 5 has administered Hepatitis-B infected injection with fluid into the body of the 2nd respondent in order to implicate that the said disease was transmitted into her body sexually through a stranger so that the 1st accused would get divorce basing on the said ground. The 2nd respondent states that the 1st accused has injected the same by stating that the injection gives her multivitamins. When the 2nd respondent got to know that the 1st accused has sexual contacts with several people, she has informed her father through Whatsapp stating that the accused would kill her and that she is anticipating danger from all the accused. On 03.01.2020, all the accused have threatened the 2nd respondent to agree for divorce and to terminate her pregnancy; as the 2nd respondent has refused the parents of the 2nd respondent along with other relatives agreed for mediation on 03.01.2020 at the quarters of the 1st accused wherein the accused Nos.1 to 4 threatened parents and relatives of 5 VS,J Crlp_1438_2020 the 2nd respondent with unprintable language and thereafter, the 2nd respondent was driven out from the house. 5. As such, the 2nd respondent was forced to live along with her parents at Tirupati. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent has visited her maternal home for living with the 1st accused for which she was beat and was thrown out of the house. By the time, as the 2nd respondent was pregnant, accused Nos.1 to 4 and 6 visited the paternal home of the 2nd respondent on 08.01.2020 threatening to terminate her pregnancy failing which the 2nd respondent would be killed. It is further stated that the accused, with an intention to harm the 2nd respondent and to escape from the illegal acts committed by them against the 2nd respondent, have submitted a false report in Spandana before the Superintendent of Police, Tirupati Urban on 13.01.2020. The 2nd respondent apprehends danger to her life including the life of the fetus in her womb because of injecting Hepatitis-B into her body and the 2nd respondent is facing life threat from the accused Nos.1 to 6. The 2nd respondent has reported the aforementioned acts of the accused before the Station House Officer, Mahila Police, Tirupati on 20.01.2020 and as there was no response, the 2nd respondent submitted a petition on 21.01.2020 before the Superintendent of Police, Tirupati Urban, but as no action has been initiated, the 2nd respondent has submitted the present complaint before the IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class Court, Tirupati. Basing on the said complaint, the court below has referred the same to Mahila Police Station, Tirupati for further investigation and report under Section 156(3). Accordingly, the Police have registered a case against the accused in Crime No.7 of 2020 on the file of Women Police Station, Chittoor District against the accused Nos.1 to 6 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 315, 328, 506 read with 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Requesting to quash the said proceedings against the accused Nos.2 to 6, the present petition is filed. 6 VS,J Crlp_1438_2020 6. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the common screening test of pregnancy, the defacto complainant was detected with Hepatitis-B Positive – HPS AG Positive which is a venereal disease in a communicable form. The radiologist opined that the six months infant in the womb of the defacto complainant would also be effected with „HYDEROCECHAPHALUS‟ and that if at all a baby is born, the child would be born as a mentally retarded child. Hence, the accused No.1 advised the defacto complainant to undergo immediate abortion. Thereafter, the 1st accused has also underwent general medical examination at CMC hospital, Vellore and it was revealed that the accused No.1 is not having any kind of a disease. Thereafter, the accused No.1 has filed F.C.O.P.56 of 2020 on the file of Family Court, Tirupati against the defacto complainant for decree of divorce. At that juncture, the accused No.1 and his family members have also approached the Superintendent of Police, Tirupati Urban by way of a complaint vide No.2/SP Spandana/2020, which was referred to Station House Officer, SV University West Police Station. He further submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioners herein are all false and the same is liable to be set-aside. 7. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant contended that the allegations levelled against the petitioners would constitute offence punishable under Sections 498A, 315, 328, 506 read with 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and that the allegations levelled against the petitioners are serious in nature, therefore, the proceedings against the petitioners cannot be quashed at this stage. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition. 8. When the criminal petition came up for hearing on 21.07.2023, this Court has passed the following interim order: 7 VS,J Crlp_1438_2020 “…Considering the facts, issues and submissions, there shall be an interim stay of operation of all further proceedings in Cr.No.7 of 2020 on the file of Women Police Station, Tirupathi Urban, Chittoor District, till the next date of hearing.” 9. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsel representing both parties and on perusal of the material available on record, the point that arises for consideration is as follows: “Whether the proceedings against the petitioners in F.I.R.No.7 of 2020 on the file of Woman Police Station, Tirupathi Urban, Chittoor District, are liable to be quashed by exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.?” 10. Section 482 of Cr.P.C saves the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under the Code or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. It is an obvious proposition that when a Court has authority to make an order, it must have also power to carry that order into effect. If an order can lawfully be made, it must be carried out; otherwise it would be useless to make it. The authority of the Court exists for the advancement of justice, and if any attempt is made to abuse that authority so as to produce injustice, the Court must have power to prevent that abuse. In the absence of such power the administration of law would fail to serve the purpose for which alone the Court exists, namely to promote justice and to prevent injustice. Section 482 of Cr.P.C confers no new powers but merely safeguards existing powers possessed by the High Court. Such power has to be exercised sparingly in exceptional cases and this power is external in nature to meet the ends of justice. 11. Time and again, the scope of powers of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. were highlighted by the Apex Court in long line of perspective pronouncements, which are as follows: 8 VS,J Crlp_1438_2020 In “R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab1”, the Apex Court laid down the following principles: (i) Where institution/continuance of criminal proceedings against an accused may amount to the abuse of the process of the court or that the quashing of the impugned proceedings would secure the ends of justice; (ii) where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the said proceeding, e.g. want of sanction; (iii) where the allegations in the First Information Report or the complaint taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not constitute the offence alleged; and (iv) where the allegations constitute an offence alleged but there is either no legal evidence adduced or evidence adduced clearly or manifestly fails to prove the charge. 12. Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers the High Court to exercise its inherent power to prevent abuse of the process of Court. In proceedings instituted on complaint exercise of the inherent power to quash the proceedings is called for only in cases where the complaint does not disclose any offence or is frivolous, vexatious or oppressive. If the allegations set out in the complaint do not constitute the offence of which cognizance is taken by the Magistrate it is open to the High Court to quash the same in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 482. It is not, however, necessary that there should be a meticulous analysis of the case, before the trial to find out whether the case would end in conviction or not. The complaint has to be read as a whole. If it appears on a consideration of the allegations, in the light of the statement on oath of the complainant that ingredients of the offence/offences are disclosed, and there is no material to show that the complaint is mala fide, frivolous or vexatious. In that event there would be no 1AIR 1960 SC 866 9 VS,J Crlp_1438_2020 justification for interference by the High Court as held by the Apex Court in “Mrs.Dhanalakshmi v. R.Prasanna Kumar2” 13. In “State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal3” the Apex Court considered in detail the powers of High Court under Section 482 and the power of the High Court to quash criminal proceedings or FIR. The Apex Court summarized the legal position by laying down the following guidelines to be followed by High Courts in exercise of their inherent powers to quash a criminal complaint: (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 FIR 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 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 2 AIR 1990 SC 494 3 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 10 VS,J Crlp_1438_2020 vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. 14. Keeping in view the above principles, I would like to examine the case on hand. 15. On a perusal of entire record available, it can be understood that several serious allegations were levelled against the petitioners herein who are the parents, sister, brother in law and maternal aunt of accused no.1. One among such allegations is that in December 2019, the 2nd respondent was diagnosed with Hepatitis B. It was later proven that the 1st accused, at the behest of the petitioners herein, had deliberately injected her with Hepatitis B- infected fluid, falsely implying that she contracted the disease sexually from a stranger. This was done to create grounds for the 1st accused to seek a divorce. The 2nd respondent claims that the 1st accused administered the injection under the pretext of giving her multivitamins. Apart from the aforesaid allegations, the complainant has raised several additional accusations against the petitioners, asserting that they subjected her to harassment and cruelty by coercing her into fulfilling further dowry demands in addition to what was paid at the time of marriage. According to the complainant, despite the dowry already given at the time of marriage, the petitioners remained dissatisfied and persistently demanded her to bring additional dowry from her parental home. The complainant has alleged that she was repeatedly taunted, humiliated, and threatened for failing to meet these unlawful demands. Prima facie, there are specific allegations against the petitioners herein that they have harassed the complainant mentally and physically. Hence, in a case of this nature, interference of this Court at the stage of trial would result in miscarriage of justice. Truthfulness or otherwise of the allegation, cannot be addressed to by this Court. It cannot either screen or assess the material on record at this stage like a mini trial to conclude that the accusation fails. A bare perusal of 11 VS,J Crlp_1438_2020 the complaints shows the allegations made against the petitioners require trial, before any decision as to their veracity is taken. 16. In view of the above discussion, as the matter requires detailed investigation, it is not appropriate to intervene at this stage. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 21.01.2025 Gss