Sharthi Uday Kumar v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

SMT JUSTI CE T. RAJANI CRI MI NAL PETI TI ON No.1 1 4 9 of 2 0 1 3 ORDER:

The criminal petition is filed seeking quash of the proceedings in CC.No.335 of 2011, against the petitioners, who are A1 to A4, on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jagtial. The offences alleged are under Sections 420 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent. None appears for the second respondent.

3.

The allegations of the complaint dated 30.06.2010, which is filed before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jagtial, are that when the marriage arrangements of the daughter of the complainant and the first petitioner were going on, three days prior to the marriage, a function was arranged where the first petitioner revealed to the daughter of the complainant that he was in love with one Anusha and showed the tattoo made on his left hand. Further allegations are that somehow on persuasion, the first petitioner agreed to marry the daughter of the complainant but later, one day before the marriage, after making all arrangements, the first petitioner left his house at Karimnagar.

4.

These being the allegations in the complaint, the counsel for the petitioners submits that, in fact, a complaint dated 30.07.2009 was given by the second petitioner before the Superintendent of Police, Karimanagar, alleging that one day prior to the marriage on

30.07.2009, the daughter of the complainant herself left the house without intimation.

5.

A perusal of the said complaint would show that it was obtained from a proper source and the stamp of the Superintendent of Police is also affixed on the said complaint. Hence, the said document can be considered as an authenticated document. The present complaint is filed on 30.06.2010 before the Magistrate, which is after almost one year of the complaint filed by the second petitioner before the Superintendent of Police. Hence, this Court opines that the present complaint is filed only as a counter blast to the complaint filed by the second petitioner.

In the light of the above, the criminal petition is allowed and the proceedings in CC.No.335 of 2011, against the petitioners, who are A1 to A4, on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jagtial, are hereby quashed. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.

__________ T. RAJANI, J December 17, 2018 DSK