Telangana High Court
CRLP/9282/2012 of R.Venkata Chinnaya Chary, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 28 December 2012
SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Petition No.9282 of 2012 ORDER:- The petitioner is A .1 in Cr.No.789 of 2012 of KPHB Colony Police Station, registered for the offences under Sections 498- A , 323 and 506 of I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The accusation made
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.
Conclusion
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDYCriminal Petition No.9282 of 2012
ORDER:-
The petitioner is A.1 in Cr.No.789 of 2012 of KPHB ColonyPolice Station, registered for the offences under Sections 498-A, 323and 506 of I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
The accusation made against the petitioner is that he along withother accused harassed the complainant – Smt.Jyothirmai Neelima onthe ground of additional dowry. The further accusation against thepetitioner is that he stealthily removed 64 gms., of gold of thecomplainant and presented the same to another woman with whom hehas questionable relationship.
Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learnedAdditional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.It is contended by the learned Counsel appearing for thepetitioner that the alleged dowry demand was in the year 2011, wherethe marriage was on 11-3-2011, and itself speaks falsity of accusationslevelled against the petitioner.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for therespondent-State opposed the petition on the ground that investigationis pending.
As seen from the complaint presented by Smt.JyothirmaiNeelima, specific accusations of harassments attributable to thepetitioner have been stated. In that view of the matter, I am not inclinedto grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, Criminal Petition is dismissed.
__________________________
28[th] December, 2012
Smr/gkv
B.Seshasayana Reddy, J