This order dismisses a quashing petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against proceedings for Sections 498-A IPC and 4 Dowry Prohibition Act. The Court held that uncontroverted FIR allegations prima facie denote a cognizable offence, precluding quashing.
Quashing petition dismissed; proceedings in F.I.R.No.27 of 2012 to continue.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3887 OF 2012
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners/A-4 to A-9 under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings in F.I.R.No.27 of 2012 of Veenavanka Police Station, Karimnagar District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A I.P.C. and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. It is alleged that the marriage of A-1 with the de facto complainant was performed on 20.06.2010. At the time of marriage, parents of the de facto complainant gave Rs.4 lakhs cash and 1 ½ tulas of gold. After marriage, she left with her husband to the house of his sister at Hyderabad. She was treated well for three months and thereafter, she was harassed both physically and mentally by A-1 to A-9 for balance dowry of Rs.2 lakhs. When she was pregnant, A-1 left her saying that she should come with money. When she gave birth to a female child, all the accused went to her parents’ house and demanded additional dowry of Rs.1 lakh for delivering a female child. Basing on the complaint given by her, police registered the above case. Hence, the petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners never lived together with the de facto complainant and therefore, the question of demanding dowry does not arise and hence, he prays to allow the quash petition.
4. Inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked or exercised when there is abuse of process of Court or to secure the ends of justice or to carry out orders passed under the Code. If the uncontroverted allegations in the F.I.R. do not make out a prima facie case, then only, the question of quashing the complaint arises. When the allegation in the
complaint prima facie made out a cognizable offence, it is the statutory duty of the police to conduct investigation. That statutory duty cannot be curtailed or interdicted at the threshold of the investigation. The allegation in the complaint would go to show that after the de facto complainant gave birth to a female child, all the accused went to her parents’ house and demanded Rs.1 lakh towards additional dowry apart from Rs.2 lakhs towards dowry. There cannot be any dispute that any unlawful demand made by the husband or relative of the husband is cruelty within the meaning of Explanation (b) to Section 498-A I.P.C. Therefore, the question of quashing the complaint does not arise and the Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed.
5. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
6. Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending in this Criminal Petition, shall stand dismissed.
______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
Date: 20.04.2012 AMD
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3887 OF 2012
DATE:20.04.2012
AMD
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the proceedings under Section 498-A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 can be quashed in view of uncontroverted allegations of dowry demand and cruelty.
Whether the High Court can interdict the statutory duty of the police to investigate a cognizable offence at the threshold stage.
Whether demand for dowry after delivery of a female child constitutes cruelty under Explanation (b) to Section 498-A IPC.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
A-4 to A-9
De facto complainant
K.C. Bhanu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
