concerned, except the allegation of pressurizing the complainant to part with her salary amount and misrepresenting about accused No.1 at the time of her marriage, there are no specific allegations against them. Although it is argued by the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 that the petitioners, who are accused Nos.3 and 4, were spending their time only in the house of accused Nos.1 and 2 and harassing the complainant, it is to be noticed that they are employed as a Staff Nurse and Lecturer. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent has placed on record additional material paper, saying that petitioners herein used to visit the house of accused Nos.1 and 2 frequently, but it is to be noticed that the said additional material paper placed before this Court is the extract of cross-examination of PW-2 in O.P.No.14 of 2010 on the file of Family Court, Secunderabad, in which, accused No.2 has deposed, stating that the petitioners were employed and were working as Staff Nurse and Lecturer and they used to drop their children in the morning in her house and pick them up in the evening. Merely because they were employed and were dropping their children at the house of accused No.2, who is the mother of the petitioners, it cannot be said that they were staying in the house of accused Nos.1 and 2 and pressurizing the complainant all through either for bringing additional dowry or threatening her, so as to attract the offences under Sections 498-A
