Telangana High Court stalls arrest in dowry harassment case

Hyderabad: Justice K Lakshman of the Telangana High Court intervened and stalled the arrest of the parents’ in-law, brother in-law and husband of an complainant in a 498-A case. The accused persons complained that the complainant, wife of the first accused person, had chosen a police station of her personal choice indicative of how there […]

Hyderabad: Justice K Lakshman of the Telangana High Court intervened and stalled the arrest of the parents’ in-law, brother in-law and husband of an complainant in a 498-A case. The accused persons complained that the complainant, wife of the first accused person, had chosen a police station of her personal choice indicative of how there were oblique motives in lodging the police complaint.

According to the petitioners they were residents of Nizamabad and the complainant was also a resident of Nizamabad while, her parents lived in Hyderabad. However, she chose the Markook police station of Siddipet to lodge a police complaint. The petitioner is a junior pathologist and the complainant is an engineering graduate.

---

The petitioners said that at the instance of the complainant the husband and his parents were taken to five different police stations and that they were victims of third degree methods employed by the police. K Durga Prasad, advocate for the petitioner argued that the brother in-law of the accused had not even visited India in the last four years but was made a party. He further pointed out that the police threatened the accused to ‘settle the matter’ and pay huge alimony to the complainant or face prosecution. Justice Lakshman directed the authorities not to arrest the petitioners and to strictly follow the directions of the Supreme Court issued in Arnesh Kumar judgement.

Protection from arrest

Justice K. Lakshman of the Telangana High Court on Thursday granted protection from arrest to an Aadhaar centre operator. The case was filed by Bheemaraju, who runs a Aadhaar enrolment centre in Marikal village Narayanapet District in connection with an FIR which was lodged against him by Upa Sarpanch of the same village. The petitioner contended that the village sarpanch threatened him with dire consequences if he didn’t relocate the Aadhar centre even without hearing to his plea that the Aadhar centre had be to located within the Tahsildar office. When the petitioner approached the police, the police lodged a false case against him on the advice of the Upa Sarpanch. The court while observing that the dispute with regard to the premises was already pending adjudication and that a false case was filed against the petitioner, stayed the arrest.