RADHARAPU RAVINDER Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) To quash the proceedings pending against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 494 IPC, they have filed these two criminal petitions.

(2.) Petitioners in Crl. P No.2802 of 2005 are the Accused Nos.1 to 5 in C.C.No.34 of 2003 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Metpally. The second respondent is the wife of A.1. On her complaint made before the Police Station, Metpally, Karimnagar District, F.I.R.No.219 of 2002 dated 17-12-2002 was registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 494 IPC read with Section 109 IPC. After the investigation charge-sheet has been filed, which is numbered as C.C.No.34 of 2003 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Metpally, for the said offences. The facts as per the charge- sheet are that after nine years of marriage of A.1 with the second respondent, he again married A2 on 20-11-2002 with the abetment of A.2 to A.5 and without the consent of the second respondent. Thereafter, A1 started harassing the second respondent physically and mentally on the instigation of A2 and threatened her to leave the house on the instigation of A3; otherwise he would kill her by pouring kerosene, while threatening so he forcibly necked her out of the house.

(3.) Petitioner in Crl.P.No.3837 of 2005 is the husband of the de facto-complainant/ second respondent herein and accused in C.C. No.190 of 2004. On a complaint given by the second respondent before the Station House Officer, Raikode Mandal, Medak District, F.I.R. No.8 of 2003 dated 5-2-2003 was registered against the accused for the offence under Sections 498-A and 494 IPC. After the investigation, the charge- sheet was filed on 31-3-2004, which is numbered as C.C.No.190 of 2004, on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Zahirabad, Medak District. As per the contentions of the charge-sheet the accused married the second respondent in a temple and they are blessed with a son and a daughter - aged about 7 and 4 years respectively. Later the accused denied the paternity of the children and got married for the second time with the daughter of L.W.2. The DNA test conducted on the accused, second respondent and the two children to establish the paternity of the children disclosed that the accused is the biological father of the said two children through the second respondent. It is further stated that the accused on the pretext that the second respondent belonged to lower caste i.e. SC Mala married A.2.