Mocharla Hemalatha, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY CRIMINAL PETITION No.4107 of 2017 ORDER:

This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in Crime No.39 of 2017 on the file of the Station House Officer, Women Police Station, Kurnool, for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 420 read with 34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State of Andhra Pradesh.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the second respondent falsely implicated the petitioners for the reasons best known to her. He further submitted that the allegations made in the complaint do not constitute any offence much less the offences alleged to have been committed by the petitioners. Per contra, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the allegations made in the complaint prima facie sufficient to investigate into the matter.

4.

A perusal of the record reveals that the petitioners are accused Nos.4 to 6 and the second respondent is the de facto complainant in Crime No.39 of 2017.

5.

A perusal of the record reveals that the marriage of the second respondent was officiated with A1 on 15.05.2010 in RCM

Churth of Phirangipuram as per Christian rites and caste customs. It is the case of the second respondent that the petitioners herein along with other accused subjected her to cruelty. It is further alleged that the petitioners herein cheated the second respondent. 6.

While exercising the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court has to take into consideration the allegations made in the complaint only. The Court is not justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to probability, reliability or genuineness of the allegations made in the complaint at the initial stage of investigation. Whether the petitioners committed the alleged offence or not is purely a disputed question of fact, which requires investigation. The material placed before the Court is prima facie sufficient to investigate into the matter in order to ascertain the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations made in the complaint.

7.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also the principle enunciated in R.P.Kapoor v. State of Punjab1, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal2, V.Y.Jose v. State of Gurajat 3 and Teeja Devi v. State of Rajasthan4, I am of the considered view that it is not a fit case to quash the criminal proceedings at the threshold.

8.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also the principle enunciated by the Supreme Court in 1 AIR 1960 SC 866 2 AIR 1992 SC 604 3 (2009) 3 SCC 78 4 2015 (1) ACR 564 (SC)

Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar5, the Station House Officer, Women Police Station, Kurnool, is hereby directed to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. in Crime No.39 of 2017 so far as the petitioners/ accused Nos.4 to 6 are concerned.

9.

With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

10.

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

______________________ T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J Date: 08.06.2017 Rns 5 2014 (8) SCALE 250