Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. With the above contentions, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to quash the present crime.

6. Sri T. Niranjan Reddy, learned senior counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent - de facto complainant, would submit that the de facto complainant, who is father of the wife of accused No.1, is having locus to lodge the complaint. In support of his contention, he relied on Section 198-A of Cr.P.C.

7. According to Section 198-A of Cr.P.C., no Court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code except upon a police report of facts which constitute such offence or upon a complaint made by the person aggrieved by the offence or by her father, mother, brother, sister or by her father's or mother's brother or sister or, with the leave of the Court, by any other person related to her by blood, marriage or adoption.

14. Whereas the learned senior counsel appearing for the de facto complainant would submit that the harassment is continuous one and there are specific allegations in the complaint. The matter is at investigation stage. The petitioners herein have filed the present application seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.400 of 2020. The aspects discussed supra would reveal that there are disputes between the petitioners herein and the daughter of the de facto complainant. There are several factual aspects which are to be investigated by the investigating officer.

15. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the marriage of accused No.1 and the daughter of the de facto complainant took place on 08.07.2017 and in proof of the same, he has filed marriage certificate issued by the State of Nevada, United States of America. In the complaint dated 09.06.2020, the de facto complainant has mentioned that the marriage was held at Hyderabad on 10.03.2018. It is a matter to be investigated by the investigating officer. With regard to cause of action and jurisdiction of the police, Pet Basheerbad Police Station is also an issue to be investigated by the investigating officer.

16. The complaint dated 09.06.2020 lodged by the de facto complainant is a detailed complaint. He has narrated entire facts from 10.03.2018 till 09.06.2020. Admittedly, the 1st petitioner and the 7 KL,J daughter of the de facto complainant are in Canada at present. Their statements have to be recorded. Even according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the 1st petitioner has already initiated proceedings seeking dissolution of marriage in accordance with law of Canada. Thus, there are matrimonial disputes between accused No.1 and the daughter of the de facto complainant. Thus, there are several aspects to be investigated by the investigating officer.