CRLP/9131/2012 of Annapu Reddy Anil Reddy (A2) Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 31 December 2012

ORDER:

The petitioners are A-2 and A-3 in Crime No.175 of 2012 ofBuchireddypalem P.S., Nellore District, registered for the offencesunder section 498-A of I.P.C., and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

The petitioners are parents of A-1/Annapureddy SudheerReddy. M.Srinivasa Rao @ Srinivasa Reddy is the father of Saritha. The said Saritha was married to A-1/Annapureddy Sudheer Reddy on09.10.2011 at Hyderabad. She joined with her husband/A-1 in U.S.A.,on 04.10.2012. She committed suicide on 01.11.2012. Her deadbodyhas been brought to India on 09.11.2012. M.Srinivasa Rao @Srinivasa Reddy presented a report before the S.I., of Police,Buchireddypalem P.S., on 24.11.2012 alleging inter-alia that hisdaughter Saritha has been harassed by the petitioners and their son,who has been arrayed as A-1, in India and thereafter she has beenharassed in U.S.A., by her husband (A-1). Basing on the said report, acase in Cr.No.175 of 2012 has been registered against the petitionersherein and their son (A-1).

Heard Sri T.Pradyumna Kumar Reddy, learned Counselappearing for the petitioners and Mrs Suguna, learned counselappearing for the second respondent/defacto complainant and learnedAddl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.

It is contended by learned counsel appearing for the petitionersthat the death of the daughter of the complainant occurred in America,where she stayed with A-1 and the petitioners cannot be heldresponsible for any disputes between the daughter of the complainantand A-1 and therefore, the petitioners deserve for grant of anticipatorybail.

Mrs Suguna, learned counsel appearing for the secondrespondent/defacto complainant submits that the daughter of the complainant has been harassed by the petitioners herein, when shestayed in their house and subsequently she has been harassed by A-1in U.S.A. The learned counsel readout the “e-mail” message sent toher parents by Smt Saritha, wherein she kindly stated her sufferings inthe hands of her husband, who has been arrayed as A-1. It is alsocontended by learned counsel that the petitioners have notapproached the Sessions Judge and therefore, their application doesnot deserve consideration.

In response, Sri T.Pradyumna Kumar Reddy, learned counselappearing for the petitioners submits that there is no inflexible rule thatthe applicants have to first approach the Sessions Court before movingapplication under section 438 Cr.P.C., before this court. He placedreliance on the Judgment of this court in 1993(1) ALT (Crl.) 309 (D.B.)between Y.Chendrasekhara Rao and othersVs.Y.V.Kamala Kumariand others.

I deem it appropriate to refer Para 28 of the cited Judgment and itis thus:

“For the foregoing reasons we hold that it is notobligatory under section 438 to move the Court ofSession in the first instance. It is always open to thisCourt when an application is filed under Section 438,without first moving the Court of Session, to consider allthe circumstances, and if the situation warrants, thisCourt can direct the party to move the Court of Session. Passing of such an order in consequence of exercise ofdiscretion is different from insisting upon the party tomove the Court of Session in the first instance as aninflexible rule of practice. The existing practice of theRegistry in returning applications filed under Section438 on the ground that the Court of Session is notmoved in the first instance, is clearly impermissible inlaw.”

The contents of the complaint lodged by the father of thedeceased and the “e-mail” message sent by the deceased to her fatherindicate how she has been dealt with by the petitioners as well as their son, who has been arrayed as A-1. In the given facts andcircumstances, I deem it appropriate not to entertain the application ofthe petitioners, straight away without their approaching the SessionsCourt.

Conclusion

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed reserving libertyto the petitioners to approach court of Sessions for grant of pre-arrestbail.

31[st] December, 2012GM

_________________________

B.Seshasayana Reddy, J