Telangana High Court
CRLP/16470/2014 of A. Nagender, S/o Late A. Bucchi Rajaiah Vs A. Shilpa, W/o A. Chandrashekhar on 31 December 2014
SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY CRIMINAL PETITION No.16470 of 2014 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.201 of 2014 of Women Police Station, Hyderabad City, registered for the offence under
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARYCRIMINAL PETITION No.16470 of 2014ORDER:
This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash theproceedings against the petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 in CrimeNo.201 of 2014 of Women Police Station, HyderabadCity,-registered for the offence under Sections 498A and 406 IPC and 3and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and thelearned Public Prosecutor.
A perusal of the record reveals that the petitioners areaccused Nos.2 and 3 and the first respondent is the de factocomplainant.As per the allegations made in the complaint, thepetitioners herein subjected the first respondent to cruelty foradditional dowry.It is further alleged that the petitioners hereinhave misappropriated the money of the first respondent.
While deciding the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., theCourt has to take into consideration the allegations made in thecomplaint only.The Court is not justified in embarking upon anenquiry to ascertain the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegationsmade in the complaint at the initial stage of the investigation.Thematerial placed before the Court is prima facie sufficient toinvestigate into the matter in order to ascertain the truthfulness orotherwise of the allegations made in the complaint.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the caseand also the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in[1]R.P.Kapoor v. State of Punjaba n d State of Haryana v.
[2]Bhajanlal, I am of the view that it is not a fit case to quash theproceedings at the initial stage of the investigation.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that theconcerned Station House Officer may be directed not to arrest thepetitioners till completion of the investigation.
In view of the principle enunciated by the Supreme Court inArnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and another[[3]], the StationHouse Officer, Women Police Station, Hyderabad City, is herebydirected to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 41-ACr.P.C. in Crime No.201 of 2014, so far as the petitioners, who areaccused Nos.2 and 3 are concerned.
With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending inthis Criminal Petition shall stand closed.
_____________________
T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J
31.12.2014Rns
[1]AIR 1960 SC 866AIR 1960 SC 866
[2]AIR 1992 SC 604AIR 1992 SC 604
[3]2014 (8) SCALE 250