V MALLIKARJUNA SHARMA Vs. V RAJYA LAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The criminal petition is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 164 of 2001 on the file of XXII Metropolitan Magistrate's Court, Hyderabad.

(2.) The petitioner herein is the husband of the 1st respondent, who filed the complaint against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 I.P.C., and also Sections 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act. As the police, W.P.S.C.C.S., investigated the matter and submitted a final report stating that the complaint is "false", the wife i.e., the 1st respondent filed a protest petition. After recording her and her father's sworn statements, the Court below took cognizance of the complaint, which was numbered as C.C. No. 164 of 2001.

(3.) The relevant facts of the complaint are as follows: The complainant is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner-A1, who is the son of A2 and A3 and their marriage was solemnized on 9-8-1997, during which time, the complainant's parents gave gold and silver ornaments in addition to dowry of Rs.1,00,000/- to the accused. After sometime, the accused developed hatred towards the complainant and started ill-treating her. A3 used to pick up quarrels on petty and trivial issues, taunt her with the active support of A1 and A2 and demand the complainant to bring more money. As she failed to comply with the alleged demands, the accused ill-treated her. In the 1st week of September, 1997, Al, at the instigation of A2 and A3, beat the complainant mercilessly and necked out her from the house. Further, all the accused threatened her to do away her with life by pouring kerosene and setting her to fire and would create an impression in the eye of public that it is a fire accident. Apprehending danger to her life, she left to her parents' house. Then, her father took her back to the accused, convinced them to look after her and left her there, but all the accused did not stop ill-treating her and told her that they would relieve her from ill-treatment if she signed on some stamped papers. When Al categorically stated that he would not lead marital life with her, she filed O.P. No.217 of 1997 for mutual consent for divorce, which was dismissed. When the complainant told Al to A3 to return all the articles given at the time of marriage and a cash of rupees one lakh, they failed to do so. They all committed breach of trust in respect of her movable properties.