Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 431 (AP)

D. Vijay Saradhi Raju v. Srilatha Dupati

2008-06-27

P.SWAROOP REDDY

body2008
JUDGMENT: This petition is field by the petitioner/ A4 for quashing the proceedings in Cr.No.74 of 2008 on the file of the Central Crime Station, Hyderabad. 2. Thepetitioner/A4 is the younger brother Al and he is an Advocate by profession. It may not be highly relevant; but it is stated by the learned Counsel for 91 the petitioner that he had been selected as a Junior Civil Judge and on account of pendency of these proceedings; he is not given appointment orders. 3. The case of the de facto complainant is that - her marriage with A1 took place on 9.8.2006 at Hyderabad; Al at that time as residing in London; herself and 98 2008(2) ALD (Crt) August her family members were mislead by all the accused, including the present petitioner, stating that Al was a C.A. and M.B.A., working in London getting salary Of 40,000.00 pounds per annum; some time after the marriage, she was taken to London with great reluctance by A1 there she was harassed continuously, as Al had intimacy with AS, with whom he was living like a spouse; she was put to untold miseries by AI; she was not allowed to visit her mother in India, who was suffering from Cancer and that all the accused, including the present petitioner (A4), instigated and participated in the offence of harassment. This is the gist of the complaint. 4. In view of the extreme nature of harassment referred to in the complaint, it is necessary to extract the lengthy complaint, which runs as follows: 1. The complainant is the legally weeded wife of the AI. The A2 is father of the AI. A3 is the mother AI. A4 is the brother of Al and AS is the lady with whom Al is having illicit relation ship. 2. The complainant submits that LWI is her father; LW2 is the marriage mediator; LW3 is her senior paternal uncle who participated in the marriage negotiations and at the Panchayat held at the house of LW2 and LW 4 is the uncle of the complainant. 3. The complainant submit that Al is her husband. Their marriage was solemnized on 9.8.2006 at Sri Satyasai Nigam, Srinagar colony, Hyderabad, according to Hindu rites and customs. Their marriage was immediately consummated and there are no issues during their wedlock. 4. 3. The complainant submit that Al is her husband. Their marriage was solemnized on 9.8.2006 at Sri Satyasai Nigam, Srinagar colony, Hyderabad, according to Hindu rites and customs. Their marriage was immediately consummated and there are no issues during their wedlock. 4. The complainant submits that at the time of her marriage her parents gave a sum of Rs.7,00,000-00 to the accused Nos.2 to 4 on behalf of accused No.1 on demand and presented 30 to lac of gold jewellery and other silver articles to the complainant. The said amount was spied for the benefit of the complainant at her matrimonial house. The complainant was also given immovable property in the form of portion of one house situated at Kumool. 5. The complainant submits that her engagement with accused No.1 took place on 19.1.2006. A few days prior to the date fixed for marriage, she received anonymous calls trom London informing that accused No.1 is already living with a married lady, who betrayed her husband and parents and that he is cheating the complainant. They also advised her not to fall into the trap of the accused Nos.1 to 4. When the complainant immediately took this to the notice of accused No.1 who stated that those calls are all blackmailing calls made with jealousy against him and to see that he should not get married to a girl in a respectable family. The complainant one day before marriage also brought _ to the notice of accused No.4 before her sisters but he also strongly denied it and supported his brother. The complainant believed the accused Nos.1 to 4 who also bluntly denied as her marriage is scheduled in a day or two. She did not even inform her parents about the said calls, as he wanted to avoid unnecessary turbulence before the marriage. Moreover, every thing was set for the marriage and even invitation cards were distributed. The complainant did not have reason to disbelieve accused No.1. Hence she went through the marriage ceremony. 6. The complainant submits that subsequently after• the marriage, the 2008(2) ALD (Cri.) August parents of the complainant received regular mails in the name of the complainant along with Photographs and CD, which fully establishes that the accused No.1 had an unholy relationship with another married lady and that he even wanted to marry her at Shiridi before he married the complainant. The said lady is accused No.5. The mails pushed the family of the complainant to make enquiries which disclosed that both the accused No.1 and 5 came to India and planned to stay at Bombay for ten days but stayed in a hotel at Bombay only 1 day prior to the marriage of the complainant with accused No.1. Thereafter, accused No.1 came alone to Hyderabad for the marriage. At the time when the mails were received by LW1, the complainant and accused No.1 were away at Tirupathi. LW1 called accused No.1 to accused No.4 to Hyderabad for a meeting. At the meeting, accused No.3 and 4 pretended anger at accused No.1, shouted at him for his misdemeanor, threw him at the feet of the complainant and advised him to ask for her pardon. Accused No.1 fell at the feet of her parents, asking them and complainant to pardon him and assuring that he would take the complainant to UK at the earliest and keep her happy. The parents of the complainant were reluctant to continue the relationship. But the complainant wanted to give accused No.1 a chance, in view of his assurance. Thereafter accused No.1 left to London, but did not bother to send papers for the Visa of the complainant Whenever the complainant or her father asked him about the papers, he used to give evasive and indifferent replies, until LW1 father of the complainant, bluntly questioned him whether he has any intentions to take the complainant to UK or not Accused No.1 who in a drunken state at that time, abused L W.1; but sent papers for Visa subsequently. The complainant obtained a Visa and went to UK on 26th July, 2007 and joined accused No.1 at London. 7. Before the complainant went to UK and after the marriage she received letters and emails from accused No.5 and her husband, stating that she is having relationship with accused No.1 and that if she (complainant) wants to come to UK she should be prepared to face the truth and prepared to live together. When the complainant put this to accused No.1, he stated that it is all false. 8. The complainant submits that after going to UK, what she witnessed there was mind-boggling. Accused No.1 lived in a rented premises. The complainant came to know that accused No.1 was still continuing to visit the accused No.5 at her house. When the complainant put this to accused No.1, he stated that it is all false. 8. The complainant submits that after going to UK, what she witnessed there was mind-boggling. Accused No.1 lived in a rented premises. The complainant came to know that accused No.1 was still continuing to visit the accused No.5 at her house. When she questioned accused No.1, he stated that he was once her tenant and that helped him financially when he was in trouble. The complainant also came to know the following facts through various sources: (a) The complainant submits that prior to the marriage, the accused Nos. 1 to 4 gave a false information to the complainant that accused No.1 is a qualified in CA and MBA and is working as financial Advisor in NJCH & drawing 40,000 pounds GBP. This said information is false and it came to the knowledge of the complainant only after her marriage. Thus accused Nos.1 to 4 cheated the complainant by 2008(2) ALD (Crl.) August including her to agree for the marriage on the false information furnished by them. (b) As informed by the husband of accused No.5, he also field a case in Gujarat against accused Nos.1 and 5 herein. (c) The complainant submits that accused No.5 became pregnant through accused No.1 and she got aborted. At the time of abortion, the accused No.1 signed as husband of accused No.5. This information was given the husband of Accused No.5 to the complainant. (d) The accused No.1 used to bring confidential documents from his office and used to say that he brought the same to blackmail his boss and get financial benefits. As informed by the husband of accused No.5, the accused No.1 created fake company letter heads and given a good conduct and efficiency certificate to accused No.5 for securing a job in another company since she was sacked and prosecuted for a theft by her previous employer. Thus the accused No.1 is a habitual criminal. (e) The accused Nos.1 and 5 wanted to get married; but did not do so as accused Nos.3 and 4 were dead opposed to the said marriage and that accused No.1 married the complainant to please his mother. This fact was revealed through a letter addressed by accused No.5 to the complainant. Thus the accused No.1 is a habitual criminal. (e) The accused Nos.1 and 5 wanted to get married; but did not do so as accused Nos.3 and 4 were dead opposed to the said marriage and that accused No.1 married the complainant to please his mother. This fact was revealed through a letter addressed by accused No.5 to the complainant. (1) In the locality where accused No.5 lives, people recognized and treat accused No.1 as the husband of accused No.5 as they were moving like wife and husband. (g) Accused No.5 describes herself as wife of accused No.1 in official documents and even changed her surname to that accused No.1 in some official documents. (h) Accused No.3 used to instigate accused No.5 to thrash the complainant to compel her to leave UK, so that she and accused No.1 could live happily without any hindrance. (i) The complainant submits that the accused No.1 is still continuing his relationship with accused No.5. There is exchange of greeting cards between the accused No.1 and 5, personal references arrested by accused No.5 in UK driving license application form clearly establishes this fact. (J) Accused No.1 has a criminal record in London, UK. 9. The complainant submits that at home, the accused No.1 seldom showed any love and affection towards the complainant. The complainant submits that the accused No.1 used harass her both physically and mentally for additional dowry and transfer of properties (my Stridhana) on his name at the instance of accused Nos.2 to 4. The accused No.1 used to abuse the complainant in a filthy language and even used to beat her. He used to provoke her and if she reacts he used to magnify the every small said incident and always found fault with the complainant. 10. The complainant submits that the accused No.1 used to abuse the complainant and her family members in a filthy language. He used to say that the complainant is his keep and not his wife. The accused No.1 at the instance of accused Nos.2 to 4 used to harass the complainant to transfer the stridhana property of the complainant to his name. The accused No.1 used to threaten the complainant that first he will see the end of the complainant at London and then see the end of her family members. The accused No.1 at the instance of accused Nos.2 to 4 used to harass the complainant to transfer the stridhana property of the complainant to his name. The accused No.1 used to threaten the complainant that first he will see the end of the complainant at London and then see the end of her family members. The accused No.1 used to always demand that the complainant should bring all electrical gadgets and luxury items for their family set up at London from per parents, lest he will give divorce to the complainant. In the month of September, 2007, the accused No.1 at the instance of accused 2 to 4 demanded that the complainant should get a sum of Rs.15,00,000.00 for purchase of house at London. When the complainant expressed her inability and asked to the accused No.1 himself to contact her father, he abused the complainant beat her black and blue and banged her head to the wall. The complainant bore everything silently, hoping that accused No.1 would change for the better. 11. The complainant submits that many times, she was not provided with food by the accused No.1, who used to say that it is waste of money to give her food as she did not get enough money and property as demanded. The accused Nos.2 and 3, more particularly, used to call the accused No.1 very frequently and abuse the complainant and her parents saying that the complainant did not get the expected dowry. The accused No.2 used to advice the accused No.1 to abandon the complainant and refers to her as "Ad}: Daani and Panikimalinadanni" which is not expected of or befitting the aged father of ones husband. At times, is the later part, the accused No.4 also joined with his parents and abused the complainant, her parents in filthy language and unparliamentary language. The accused Nos.1 to 4 always used to impute incestuous relationship of complainant with all male members of her parental family. 12. The complainant submits that in or about November 2007, accused No.1 purchased an old house at Astral, College Road, North frest Kent, London and both of them shifted to the said house. After shifting, the harassment of the complainant at the hands of accused No.1 increased. Apart from the usual harassment as narrated above accused No.1 started remaining out of the house most of the time. After shifting, the harassment of the complainant at the hands of accused No.1 increased. Apart from the usual harassment as narrated above accused No.1 started remaining out of the house most of the time. He often to return till late in the night. The complainant used to feel lonely, afraid and insecure, as the house in London was secluded. Sometimes, when the complainant called up accused No.1 beyond 10 p.m., to request him to return, he used to abuse her, stating that she had no right to call him. Accused No.1 stepped up physical harassment of the complainant, emboldened by the loneliness and absence of immediate neighbours, ruling out the possibility of external interference to attend to the bare necessities of the complainant. He took away the gold and other valuables of the complainant and kept it under his lock and key. Thought the complainant was able to salvage her gold substantially, some items of her jewellery are still remain with accused No.3, who was crazy about the properties getting by her daughter-in-law on some pretext or other. 13. The complainant submits that though her parents were not in contact with the accused No.1 from March, 2007 to February 2008, there was no day without abusing by using unparliamentary language against the parents of the complainant. From the day one the complainant joined the accused No.1 in London, the accused No.1 prevented the complainant to have any access for communications and prevented her from talking to her parents. She was able to use it only -, ~t the pleaser of accused No.1. The complainant was not even allowed to talk to her parents when her mother was in a critical condition (on ventilator) in December, 2007. When the complainant came to know that her mother was seriously ill as she undergone major operation followed by radiation and chemotherapy and there was no hope for her survival, through her relatives, she requested the accused No.1 to send her to India to see her mother at least at the cost of her father. But the accused No.1 refused to send her to India. Some times he used to say that he will send her on a condition that her father (LW-1) should beg him, agree to give the properties demanded by him bear the to and fro charges. But the accused No.1 refused to send her to India. Some times he used to say that he will send her on a condition that her father (LW-1) should beg him, agree to give the properties demanded by him bear the to and fro charges. The accused No.1 also used to say that at once the complainant goes to India against his wish she should not come back to London and eve~ if she comes he will not accept her. 14. The complainant submits that on December 19, 2007 the accused No.1 became so violent abused the complainant beat her indiscriminately and tried to kill her with a knife without any fault of the complainant but for a simple reason that the complainant asked her to permit go to India to see her ailing mother. She took the help of some of her previous co-tenant in London, took a taxi went to their house. She took shelter with them for four days. The accused No.1 did not even bother to enquire about the whereabouts of the complainant. Finally, on 4th day, the complainant herself called the accused No.1 and asked him to take her back till she goes back to India after arranging finances for tickets, as she has no means and London is unknown place to her and that taking shelter in other house for longer period looks bad. The accused No.1 demanded that she should give it in writing that. She herself left the house and he has not done anything. The complainant refused to give such a letter to the accused No.1. 15. Since the torture of the accused No.1 increased. He became wilder. By that time the complainant came to know that she became pregnant. Though the accused No.1 know that the complainant carrying his baby, there was no change in his attitude. He used to frequently abuse the complainant in a filthy language saying that it is a waste to feed her and said that it is up to the complainant to give birth to a child or to abort, as he cannot feed the child or take any additional burden. 16. He used to frequently abuse the complainant in a filthy language saying that it is a waste to feed her and said that it is up to the complainant to give birth to a child or to abort, as he cannot feed the child or take any additional burden. 16. In the month of February, 2008, on the advice of the doctor when the complainant requested the accused No.1 to send her to India to see her mother and to take rest, as she is pregnant, the accused No.12 became wild, abused the complainant in a filthy language and slapped her on her face and stated that she should not• ask him once again to send her to India. Unable to bear the torture and the wild behavior of the accused No.1, the complainant sought the help of emergency police for security in London. When the police responded to her call and came down -to the house the accused No.1 pretended as if he has not done anything and it is only the complainant who made a fuss without any reason. After hearing both sides, the police asked the complainant whether to prosecute him or not. The complainant, did not insist for his prosecution in an unknown place and requested them to leave him with a warning. Immediately, the complainant made a call to her parents and requested them to send her a ticket to come back to India. 17. The complainant submits that she received the tickets from India after three days. These three days, when the complainant was packing her belongings and certificates she came across certain incriminating documents, which show that accused No.1 is a habitual criminal. Immediately, after taking all her belongings, the complainant left to the house of her co-tenants (friends) and from there she flew back to India. Accused No.1 did not provide food or even water to complainant for four days from 6.2.2008 to 9.2.2008, as the complainant lodged a complaint with police. 18. The accused Nos. 1 to 4 misappropriated the cash and things given by the parents of the complainant for the benefit of the complainant at her matrimonial house. That apart the complainant was subjected to untold ' physical and mental harassment by accused Nos.1 to 5, as narrated in the above paragraphs. 18. The accused Nos. 1 to 4 misappropriated the cash and things given by the parents of the complainant for the benefit of the complainant at her matrimonial house. That apart the complainant was subjected to untold ' physical and mental harassment by accused Nos.1 to 5, as narrated in the above paragraphs. Accused No.1 cheated the complainant by misrepresenting his qualifications before marriage, concealing his relationship with accused No.5 prior to marriage the continuing the same after marriage. The accused Nos.1 to 5 have thus committed offences punishable under Sections 498(a), 406, 420 and 506 IPC and 4 and 6 of dowry Prohibition Act, Hence this complaint. 5. As far as the present petition is concerned - in Paragraph 4 of the complaint, it is mentioned that "a dowry of Rs.7 .00 lakhs was given to A2 to A.4 on behalf of A1"; in paragraph 5, it is mentioned that "on learning about the extra marital affairs between Al and A5, even before the marriage, one day before the marriage, the complainant brought it to the notice of A.4, in the presence of sisters, he strongly denied about it and supported his brother"; in Paragraph 6, it is mentioned that "Immediately after the marriage, while the complainant and Al were at Tirupathi, her father received mails about the affair between Al and A5 and her father called Al to the place of A4 at Hyderabad for meeting.. At that time A3 and A4 pretended anger at accused No.1 and shouted at Al and threw him at the feet of the complainant and advised him to ask for pardon"; In paragraph 8(a), it is mentioned that "prior to the marriage Al to A4 gave false information to the complainant that Al is qualified in CA and MBA and is working as Financial Advisor in NJCH and drawing 40,000 pounds GBP, which is false information." Thus Al to A4 cheated the complainant by inducting her with all false information. In Paragraph 9 and 10 it is mentioned that: "at the instance of A2 to A.4, Al used to harass the complainant asking her to transfer the property on his name and for additional dowry and also to transfer Stridhana properties and Rs.l5.00 Lakhs for purchasing a house at London". In Paragraph 9 and 10 it is mentioned that: "at the instance of A2 to A.4, Al used to harass the complainant asking her to transfer the property on his name and for additional dowry and also to transfer Stridhana properties and Rs.l5.00 Lakhs for purchasing a house at London". In Paragraph 11 it is mentioned that "A.2 and A.3 used to frequently abuse the complainant and at times A4 also join his parents in abusing the complainant. In Paragraph 11, it is further stated that "A1 to A4 always used to impute incestuous relationship with all male members of her parental family. Further in Paragraph 18 of the complainant, it is stated that"A1 to A4 misappropriated the cash and things given by the parents of the complainant." 6. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the allegations are mostly omnibus in nature against the petitioner. Still there is material against him about his participation in the harassment. The learned Counsel appearing for the contesting respondent contends that the statement of a mediator - K. Showri Reddy, whose name is referred to in the complaint, reveals serious allegations against the present petitioner. 7. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the averments, which are not found in the complaint, cannot be taken into consideration. As per the statement of this witness recorded by the police under Section 161 Cr.P.C., in all the proceedings, the present petitioner was taking active participation and acted as a guiding force to the other accused. At this stage, it cannot be disbelieved that the petitioner,. Who is an advocate and who was residing at Hyderabad has taken an active part in all these activities. In case the allegations of the complainant are true, it is difficult to believe that all things have taken place without the knowledge of A4, the present petitioner. However, it is not desirable to express any further opinion about the material against the petitioner. It also cannot be said that there is no prima facie case against the petitioner. Though all the allegations made in the statement of this witness, K. Showri Reddy, recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., by the police are not mentioned in the lengthy complaint, it cannot be said that those allegations cannot be taken into consideration. It also cannot be said that there is no prima facie case against the petitioner. Though all the allegations made in the statement of this witness, K. Showri Reddy, recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., by the police are not mentioned in the lengthy complaint, it cannot be said that those allegations cannot be taken into consideration. Further, the name of this witness is cited in the complaint and he is said to be the mediator for the marriage. 8. Though it may result in hardship to the petitioner, as his prospects of employment are said to have been affected on account of the pendency of this case, it cannot be sole ground for discharging him. It is reported by the learned Counsel for the first respondent that the charge-sheet had already been filed. In case the charge-sheet is not filed, the investigation must be completed and final report must be filed within one month from today. There fore the petitioner ' can approach the trial Court for expeditious disposal of the case. 9. With the directions, as above, the petition is dismissed. 10. It is clarified that this order will not in any way preclude any of the accused, including the present petitioner (A-4) from challenging the charge-sheet, if filed, by way of filing either a discharge petition or a fresh quash petition.