BAKKA KRISHNA Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADHESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.495 of 2012 of Uppal Police Station, Cyberabad, filed this Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings initiated against them in the above crime, which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 494 and 506 of I.P.C.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are as under:- The 2nd respondent/de facto complainant (hereinafter referred to as the "2nd respondent") lodged a report stating that her marriage was solemnized with the 1st petitioner on 01.06.1997 and at the time of marriage, her parents presented Rs.5.00 lakhs cash and 20 tolas of gold as dowry and, after one week of their marriage, the 1st petitioner started harassing the 2nd respondent both physically and mentally for want of additional dowry. It is further stated that the 1st petitioner habituated to liquor, used to come home in drunken condition in the midnights, assaulted her and he kicked her even when she was pregnant. When the brother and mother of the 2nd respondent questioned the 1st petitioner about his acts, the 1st petitioner abused them in filthy language and did not allow them to his house. To meet the demand made by the 1st petitioner, the mother and brother of the 2nd respondent gave Rs.5.00 lakhs to him as additional dowry and also gave a house in Seetarama Colony, but the 1st petitioner did not stop the harassment. After two years of the marriage, the mother of the 1st petitioner tried to leak the gas to kill the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent lodged a complaint in Woman Protection Cell, which was compromised before the elders and thereafter, the 2nd respondent begotten two children. Thereafter, the 1st petitioner and his mother again started harassing the 2nd respondent and sent her out of the house in the midnight and thereafter, the 1st petitioner brought the 2nd petitioner to his house and maintaining an illegal relationship with her. When the 2nd respondent asked the same, the 1st petitioner replied that he is not having any relation with the 2nd petitioner. When the 2nd respondent was staying in her husband's house, both the petitioners have tried to kill the 2nd respondent. Hence, the complaint.

(3.) Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners/A-1 and A-2, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1st respondent/State, learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent and perused the record.