Telangana High Court
CRLP/9583/2012 of Sk.Masthanamma Vs The State of A.P. rep. by P.P. on 31 December 2012
SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9583 OF 2012 ORDER: This petition is filed by the petitioners (respondents 2 to 6 in DVC 1 of 2012) under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in DVC 1 of 2012 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Darsi. 2. It is alleged in the
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANUCRIMINAL PETITION NO.9583OF 2012
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.
ORDER:
This petition is filed by the petitioners (respondents 2 to 6in DVC 1 of 2012) under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash theproceedings in DVC 1 of 2012 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of IClass, Darsi.
2. It is alleged in the complaint that marriage of 2[nd]respondent herein with one Kamal Basha (1[st] respondent in DVC)took place on 21-11-2009 and they lived happily for some timeand out of wedlock, they were blessed with a daughter.Thereafter, her husband and the petitioners herein startedharassing her and they also tried to pour kerosene on her. Whenshe informed her husband as she was apprehending danger, heused to beat her. It is further alleged that her parents gave cashof Rs.7 lakhs and gold ornaments worth Rs.3,00,000/-. Herhusband and petitioners herein threatened her that they willcontact second marriage and sent her out of the house by force.Hence, the complaint.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners hereincontended that the petitioners are staying away from the maritalhome of the 2[nd] respondent and her husband and they areresiding in different villages, that an omnibus accusation islevelled against them so as to implicate them falsely and hence,continuation of proceedings is nothing but abuse of process oflaw.
4. Inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can beexercised to prevent abuse of process of Court or to secure theends of justice or to carry out the orders passed under this Code.
5. In respect of this case, a counseling has been conductedby the competent authority and in the said counseling, husbandndrefused to take 2respondent back so as to lead marital life andhence, case was referred to Court again.
6. It is specifically alleged in the complaint that after ndmarriage, the present petitioners were also harassing the 2respondent herein by beating her and they were also demandingdowry. Therefore, uncontroverted allegations in the complaintmade out a case with regard to domestic violence and hence,there are no grounds to quash the proceedings.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that thepresence of the petitioners before the trial Court may be dispensedwith.For that purpose, the petitioners have to file an application todispense with their presence and thereafter, considering the factthat the petitioners are residing separately, the trial Court shallconsider the application in accordance with law.
8. With the above direction, the Criminal Petition isdismissed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this CriminalPetition shall stand closed.
DATED: 31-12-2012
Hsd
________________
K.C.BHANU, J