IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF IX METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, AT MIYAPUR, CYBERABD, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.
CRLMP No:
of 2010
In
CC No:
Between:
… Applicant
And
1.
wife , D/o. Venkat ,
2.
SATYAN, S/o Venkat ,
3.
VENKAT, S/o.Koteswara ,
4.
PADMAVATI, W/o.V.Venkat .
of 2008
5.
Witness-1,
6. Witness-1,
(The place of occurrence of offence is under jurisdiction of this Hon’ble court)
APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 340 CrPC READ WITH SECTION 195 CrPC.
The applicant humbly submits as follows:
1. Humbly submits that, this applicant is the accused (A1) in CC.No. AAA/2008, the respondent no.1 is the defacto complainant and Respondent no.2 to 5 are the witnesses in the case CC.No.AAAof 2008 on the file of this Hon’ble Court.
2. The applicant humbly submits that respondent No.1 to 6 has given false statements to the Kukatpally Police and the respondent No.1 has also furnished false information through written communication to the Kukatpally police with intent to cause injury to the applicant. This applicant submitted the documentary evidences to the Deputy Commissioner of Police which available to with applicant and the Deputy Commissioner of Police, madapur zone, opinioned in the Right To Information Act-2005 reply letter to applicant saying that, the documentary evidences available at Bangalore provide information that the allegations in the complaint and in charge sheet are false. Due to false statements given to Kukatpally police, applicant got arrested and sent to jail by the Kukatpally Police. Further submit that the false information to the police made applicant’s relatives as accused in the criminal complaint FIR.No.BBB/2008 and attempted to send to Jail. All the respondents given false statements knowingly that those are false and used as true statements to cause injury to the applicant’s reputation the society, defamation, financial loss, loss of normal living life, mental and physical harassment. The details of the false statements are as described below:
I. Humbly submits, Respondent No.1 to 5 made false statements to the Kukatpally Police by saying applicant (A1) was given Rs.3,00,000/- cash, 80 Tulas gold and Rs.40,00,000/- worth agriculture land as dowry at the time of Respondent No.1 marriage with applicant (A1). The false statement given to Kukatpally Police caused arrest of applicant under sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and was sent to jail. In contra said property items ever do not exist on applicant’s name with the knowledge of the applicant. Further submit that Respondent No.1 admitted in her affidavit, in the Transfer Petition no. 5/2010, on the file of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, by saying the said property items were given to Respondent No.1 as Sridhan as per the family tradition of the Respondent No.1 parents. The false information given to police caused the applicant arrested and was send to jail under section 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and caused serious damage to the applicants reputation in Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India, where this applicant worked as Scientific Officer Grade-D as well as in the living society and also caused harassment to the applicant mentally and physically. Also submit that this incident made applicant loss of mental peace, financial loss and loss of normal living life. Applicant humbly submits that false statement given by the respondents could cause conviction of applicant in criminal case, hence applicant request the Honorable court to order for preliminary enquiry and order the respondents for prosecution in the interest of justice.
II. Further submit, Respondent No.3 to 5 gave false statement to the Kukatpally Police by saying that applicant kept the Respondent No.1 in a house and did not provide food during November-2007 at Bangalore City and also said that applicant did not provide kitchen items to the Respondent No.1 to cook her food. In contra all the respondents know that she was not in house and was staying in WIPRO Company provided hotel, Nahar Heritage, St.Marks Road, Bangalore City and made calls to Respondent No.1 room telephone number by calling the reception and asking to connect to the room. Also submit that Respondent No.1 ordered room service and had sufficient veg and non-veg itmes. Respondent No.1 signed on the room service bill. Also submit that break fast was unlimited and was free of cost during the Respondent No.1 stay at the hotel. Also submit that during the Respondent No.1 hotel stay two lady friends met the Respondent No.1 at the room and entire day they were roaming around the city and enjoyed. This kind of City seeing taken place couple of times. It is further submit that Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.2 did not made any allegation saying that during her visit to Bangalore in 2007 she was treated in the way that Respondent No.3 to 5 described. Applicant humbly submits that false statement given by the respondents could cause conviction of applicant in criminal case, hence applicant request the Honorable court to order for preliminary enquiry and order the respondents for prosecution in the interest of justice.
III. Further submit, Respondent No.1 to 5 made false statements to the Kukatpally Police by saying that applicant and applicant’s brother in-law slapped the
Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.2 and necked out them out of matrimonial home and on the same day gold ornaments of the Respondent No.1 were taken from her and thrown out off matrimonial home. This single false statement given to the police made the applicant’s brother-in-law as accused in the criminal complaint, CC. No. 1280/2008 in this Hon’ble Court. In contra Respondent No.1 admitted in MC.No.145/2009 on the file of Hon’ble Family Court, L.B. Nagar, R.R. District that Respondent No.1 left the matrimonial when applicant was not at home and not even available on phone. Further submit that above two contradicting versions could not possible to happen to occur in real time scenario and both are false statements. Further submit that neighbors were present at applicant’s matrimonial home while Respondent No.1 was leaving the house. Respondent No.1 said that she will return in 15 days. Kukatpally Police failed to investigate the crime properly and failed to visit and collect the neighbor’s statements from Bangalore.
IV. Further submit Respondent No.1 made false statement before the police by saying that applicant kept the Respondent No.1 in house and locked on 20th May-2008, during this time Respondent No.1 made phone calls to her relatives and informed the same. In contra Respondent No.1 was not locked in house and did not made phone calls to her relatives during the above said time. Further submit during this period Respondent was free and also did shopping with friends, neighbors and purchased gifts for a party in the building that applicant lived. During shopping Respondent No.1 made phone calls to applicant and also applicant made phone calls to the Respondent No.1 and talked with Respondent No.1 as well as with her friends during shopping. During shopping Respondent No.1 met the neighbor family son-in-law and their grand daughter and after shopping Respondent and her friend were dropped at house by the neighbor’s son-in-law. Applicant humbly submits that false statement given by the respondents could cause conviction of applicant in criminal case, hence applicant request the Honorable court to order for preliminary enquiry and order the respondents for prosecution in the interest of justice.
V. Further submit, Respondent No.1 to 5 made false statements to the Kukatpally Police by saying that applicant and applicant’s sister taunted the Respondent No.1 on the house hold items purchased by the brother of the Respondent No.1 for the Respondent No.1 family. Further submit that Respondent No.1 made false statement that Respondent No.1 was demanded for additional dowry. As per Respondent No.1 version dowry is not given and demanding additional dowry is false and even none of the witness’s statement supports the Respondent No.1 additional dowry demand allegation. Even as per Respondent No.1 affidavit submitted in MC.No.145/2009 on the file of Hon’ble Family Court, L.B. Nagar, R.R. District, Respondent No.1 did not allege that Respondent No.1 was subjected to cruelty for additional dowry demands while Respondent No.1 was alleging the cruelty happened to her. Applicant humbly submits that false statement given by the respondents could cause conviction of applicant in
criminal case, hence applicant request the Honorable court to order for preliminary enquiry and order the respondents for prosecution in the interest of justice.
VI. Further submit, Respondent No.1 made false statements to the Kukatpally Police by saying that applicant was advised by the applicant’s parents via phone although the applicant’s parents were not having STD facility at home and even at their living village. The false written statement caused registration of criminal complaint FIR. No. 616/2008 on illiterate and old aged in-laws of the Respondent No.1. Applicant humbly submits that false statement given by the respondents could cause conviction of applicant in criminal case, hence applicant request the Honorable court to order for preliminary enquiry and order the respondents for prosecution in the interest of justice.
VII. Further submit, Respondent No.1 has given false information to the police through the written communication letter by saying that Respondent No.1 was not facilitated with phone facility during the stay of Respondent No.1 with the applicant at Bangalore. In contra Respondent No.1 was provided with new phone connection no. 9731056143 and Respondent No.1 was daily taking with her relatives and friends. Further submit that Respondent No.1 was received calls from her friends and applicant and Respondent No.1 was invited for marriage invited for the marriage of her friend during the second week of May-2008. Even the other respondents were given statement to police saying that Respondent No.1 called them on phone reveals Respondent No.1 was facilitated phone. Applicant humbly submits that false statement given by the respondents could cause conviction of applicant in criminal case, hence applicant request the Honorable court to order for preliminary enquiry and order the respondents for prosecution in the interest of justice.
VIII. Further submit, Respondent No.1 gave false information to the Kukatpally Police saying applicant publicized saying that Respondent No.1 was carrying 3 months pregnancy while she was carrying 4 weeks pregnancy. No details of false publicity is disclosed in police investigation report provide information that allegation is false. Applicant humbly submits that false statement given by the respondents could cause conviction of applicant in criminal case, hence applicant request the Honorable court to order for preliminary enquiry and order the respondents for prosecution in the interest of justice.
IX. Further submit, Respondent No.1 gave false information to the Kukatpally Police saying she informed the applicant about her 4 weeks pregnancy before
20th May-2008, after she got tested in hospital. In contra Respondent did not went to hospital before 22nd May-2008 and tested for pregnancy.
X. Further submit, Respondent No.6 made false statements to the Kukatpally Police by saying that applicant was in Hyderabad on April-5th and Respondent No.6 solved the issues between the applicant, applicant parents and other respondents. Further submit that Respondent No.6 gave false information to police that he made phone calls to applicant 4 days before to filing the complaint FIR No. 616/2008, i.e., in the first week of June-2008 and also said that applicant refused to speak with him. In contra, on April 5th applicant was in Bangalore City and on the same day applicant drawn money from his bank account. Also his telephone calls details show that applicant was in Bangalore City.
XI. Further submit, Respondent No.1 made false statement before the police by saying that applicant taken gold ornaments from Respondent No.1 on the day 22nd May-2008. During police investigation the blood relative and the brother of the Respondent No.1 did not support Respondent No.1 allegation and is false. Even the other blood relatives also did not support Respondent No.1 allegation and is false. Considering the Respondent No.1 affidavit version in case MC. No.145/2009 applicant is not physically present with Respondent No.1, to take her gold ornaments. This provides information that Respondent No.1 approaching with unclean hands. Further submit, considering the allegation on gold items is false police did not register the case under relevant IPC section(s).
XII. Further submit, Respondent No.1 to 5 made false statement before the police by saying that applicant made forcibly abortion to the Respondent No.1 at Bangalore on 20th May-2008. Whereas Respondent No.1 was carrying pregnancy till May-23rd 2008, i.e., the day Respondent No.1 left the matrimonial home.
XIII. Further submit, Respondent No.3 to 5 made false statement before the police by saying that applicant took the Respondent No.1 to the hospital and in hospital pregnancy abortion is happened. In contra, Respondent No.1 was not visited any hospital till May 22nd 2008 and on 23rd May-2008 Respondent No.1 left the matrimonial home despite applicant was requesting the Respondent No.1 to stay with him at Bangalore saying Respondent no.1 will return in 15 days. At the time Respondent No.1 was leaving the matrimonial home neighbors of the matrimonial home were present. Kukatpally police failed to visit Bangalore and failed to collect neighbor’s statements to reveal the actual facts. Applicant humbly submits that false statement given by the
respondents could cause conviction of applicant in criminal case, hence applicant request the Honorable court to order for preliminary enquiry and order the respondents for prosecution in the interest of justice.
XIV. Further submit, Respondent No.1 gave false statement through written communication to the Kukatpally Police by saying that applicant and applicant’s sister use to harass the Respondent No.1 to get rid of her to go for another alliance. In contra none of the blood relatives of the Respondent No.1 supported this allegation and is false hence from police investigation report allegation is dropped. Also submit that applicant’s sister is married and not lived with applicant’s family at Bangalore City to cause harassment to the Respondent No.1.
XV. Further submit, Respondent No.3 to 5 gave false statement to the Kukatpally Police by saying that Respondent was at applicant’s house for 5 days and applicant’s parents demanded the applicant for money. In contra after Respondent No.1 joined with the applicant, Respondent No.1 did not live with applicant’s parents as said by the Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.1 was lived only in Bangalore and none of the applicant’s relatives were lived in applicant’s matrimonial home.
3. Applicant humbly submits that respondents gave false statements to the police with intent to cause conviction to the applicant and to applicant’s relatives. The statements made by the Respondent No.1 to 6 are known as false statements by the all respondents and said to the police as true statements which caused the arrest of the applicant under sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and 498A IPC.
4. Applicant humbly submits for all the false statements made by the Respondent No.1 to 6 evidences are possible to collect by police and are available. Applicant requests this Honorable court to order the enquiry in the interest of justice and secure the ends of justice.
5. The Investigation Officer of the FIR.No.616/2008 did not conduct enquiry at Bangalore, i.e., alleged allegations occurrence place and failed to reveal the facts. Further request that Hon’ble Court to order Police Commissioner level enquiry for this application.
P RAY E R
1. Under the aforementioned circumstances, it is prayed that the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to make preliminary enquiry into the offence of perjury committed by the all respondents Make a complaint prosecute and punish all the respondents for the offences committed.
2. Under the aforementioned circumstances SHO Kukatpally PS failed to investigate the FIR.No.616/2008, hence applicant request this Hon’ble court to order the preliminary enquiry by the senior police officer higher equal rank to the Deputy Commissioner Police grade, in the department. Further request to order for enquiry on failure to investigate the complaint preferred by the Respondent No.1 at Bangalore City and take appropriate action on the police officers.
3. Applicant humbly prays Hon’ble Court to grant appearance exemption before the court till enquiry and investigation is completed on the application.
LIST OF EVIDENCES ENCLOSED
1. Right To Information Act-2005 reply letter from Deputy Commissioner of Police, Madapur zone, Cyberabad, R.R. District.
2. Respondent No.1 filed affidavit in a Transfer Petition No.5/2010, on the file of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
3. Respondent No.1 filed affidavit in MC. No.145/2009 on the file of Hon’ble Family Court, L.B. Nagar, R. R. District.
4. Respondent No.1 in-laws phone outgoing call details.
5. Respondent No.1 pregnancy test report and doctors prescription.
Cyderabad,
Adacate/ Applicant:
Dt:26-03-2010
Sig:
VERIFICATION
I, Pavuluri Munirathnam, S/o Muneiah Naidu, Aged 31 years, Occ: Software Engineer, R/o No.3, 5th Main, 5th Cross, Chikkalsandra, Hanumagirinagara, Bangalore-61 do hereby declare that the above stated facts are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Hence verified.
DATE: PLACE: HYDERABAD APPLICANT
