IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7834 OF 2012 Between:
Mahaboob Hussain & Ors. … Petitioners/Accused V/s.
Mubeena Begum & Anr. … Respondents/complainant Counsel for Petitioners : Sri Bhaskar Poluri Counsel for Respondents : Public Prosecutor The court made the following : [order follows] HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7834 OF 2012 O R D E R :
This Criminal Petition is filed to quash proceedings in CC.No. 380 of 2012 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mahboobnagar for alleged offences under section 498-A IPC and section 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. Heard both sides.
3. Advocate for petitioners submitted that it is alleged in the charge sheet that on 30/3/2012 during late hours petitioner no.1 came to the house of defacto complainant in a drunken condition and abused her, then he made a demand of additional dowry of Rs.one lakh but the first petitioner is an employee working in Excise Department and as per the document produced from his office would show that on 29/3/2012, 30/3/2012 and 31/3/2012 he was on duty and he was asked to do work beyond office hours on these days because of Assembly Session and that his place of employment is 300 KMs away from the place of incident and it is humanly not possible to travel a distance of 600 KMs over night. He submitted that because of this incident, the Police at Mahbubnagar entertained FIR and investigated the case other wise other allegation relate to Koppal which is in Karnataka State. He submitted that since the document produced by first petitioner disclose that he was on duty at the relevant point of time, the proceedings in the charge sheet have to be quashed.
4. I have perused the material papers filed along with this criminal petition.
5. I have seen the statement of witnesses recorded by police during investigation. LWs 6 and 7 stated before police about the incident dated 30/3/2012 between 01:30 and 02:00 a.m., and also to the presence of first petitioner, These two witnesses are independent witnesses. Now the correctness of the statements of these two witnesses with reference to the document produced by the petitioner no.1 cannot be decided in a petition filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. it is a matter of evidence and the plea of ‘alibi’ has to be decided only during trial while appreciating the testimony of witnesses examined on behalf of prosecution. On the ground of “alibi” petitioners cannot claim quash of proceedings. The grounds urged on behalf of petitioners are the defences available to them, which they have to urge before trial court.
6. For the above reasons, I am of the view that there are no grounds to quash the proceedings and this criminal petition is liable to be dismissed.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed by giving liberty to the petitioners to urge all these grounds before trial court and the trial court shall consider the same without being influenced by dismissal of this criminal petition.
JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR .
17/07/2014
I s L
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7834 OF 2012 Circulation No. 22
Date: 17 /07/2014 Court Master : I s L Computer No. 43