Danekula Sumathi vs State Of Telangana

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/A3 to A5 in C.C.No.2093 of 2022 on the file of the I Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Malkajgiri.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.

The 2nd respondent filed complaint against her husband and in-laws. It is alleged in the complaint that her marriage with A1 was performed on 22.06.2018 and at the time of marriage, Rs.10.00 lakhs cash and other gold and silver articles were given. She joined with her husband in joint family in Meerpet and led marital life. She was taken good care of for one year. On 23.05.2019, she delivered a baby girl and since the date of birth of the daughter, A2 instigated A1/husband to get additional dowry and started harassing physically and mentally. Twice A1 pressed her throat for additional dowry and she was necked out of the house. These petitioners, who are related to A1 were also intervening in their family affairs of A1 and instigated A1. The husband harassed her by listening to the words of these petitioners. Three months prior to the complaint, she was beaten and sent out of the house and since then, she is living with her parents. On 26.09.2022, when the 2nd respondent along with her parents went to the house of A1, A2 poured chilly powder and questioned as to how she has come without getting additional dowry.

On the basis of the complaint, the police registered the case and after investigation, filed charge sheet against these petitioners and A1 and A2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that bald allegations are leveled against these petitioners stating that they have abetted A1. These petitioners were living separately and had nothing to do with the family affairs of A1 and the 2nd respondent. In the said circumstances, prayed this Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent would submit that these petitioners are equally responsible for torturing the 2nd respondent physically and mentally. These petitioners have provoked A1 to harass the 2nd respondent. Civil case is also pending which was filed by A1 for declaring a plot which was given to the 2nd respondent to be transferred to his name, for the said reason, all these issues can only be decided during the course of trial.

As seen from the complaint and Section 161 Cr.P.C statements and also the investigation, these petitioners are living separately in their respective houses. They were also married by the time of the marriage of A1 and 2nd respondent had taken place. In the entire complaint, the allegation against these petitioners is that they were instigating A1 and as a result, A1 was harassing the defacto complainant. The allegation of demand for additional dowry and beating is against A1 and A2. However, the allegation against these petitioners is that they were provoking and abetting A1 to harass the 2nd respondent.

In Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and others v. State of Bihar [(2022) 6 Supreme Court Cases 599], the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that unless there are specific and distinct allegations against the accused, the proceedings can be quashed. Under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, the Court should be careful in proceeding against relatives who are roped in on the basis of vague and omnibus allegations.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand [(2010) 7 Supreme Court Cases 667] held that the Courts have to scrutinize the allegations made with great care and circumspection, especially against husband’s relatives who were living in different cities and rarely have visited or stayed with the couple.

In view of the petitioners being arrayed as accused only on the basis of a bald allegation that they were responsible for abetting A1, this court finds that all the proceedings against these petitioners is nothing but abuse of process of the court and accordingly, the criminal proceedings against these petitioners are liable to be quashed.

In the result, the proceedings against the petitioners/A3 to A5 in C.C.No.2093 of 2022 on the file of the I Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Malkajgiri, are hereby quashed.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.