On these, among other grounds, companyplaint came to be lodged by the second respondent.
They lived together for about 20 days in matrimonial house.
It is alleged by the second respondent, that during her stay at the matrimonial house for the period of afore mentioned 20 days, the first appellant did number companye close to the companyplainant and he was number even willing to talk freely with the companyplainant, despite her sincere efforts to companye close to her husband.
P.C. seeking to recall NBW issued against him and directed appellant number2 to file an application under Section 205 Cr.
442 of 2015 on the file of XIV Metropolitan Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ASHOK RAJ SINGH Date 2017.09.06 Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B. Nagar, arising out of Crime No.
P.C. seeking to dispense with his presence before the trial Court.
It is further alleged, that the parents of the companyplainant had spent about rupees fifteen lakhs for the marriage ceremony and rupees twenty lakhs for the gold ornaments.
We have heard learned companynsel for the rival parties who are present and perused the record.
442 of 2015, pending on the file of XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, L.B. Nagar.
The appellants herein approached the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against the appellants.
Even after the first appellant left for Australia, the family members of the first appellant including the second appellant were number talking to the companyplainant.
The High Court by the impugned order has rejected the prayer of the appellants to quash the proceedings initiated against them, and instead directed appellant number1 to file an application under Section 70 2 Cr.
Respondent No.2, though served, has chosen to remain absent.
151 114636 IST Reason of 2015 of Saroornagar Women Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code, are called in question.
It is also alleged, that the first appellant never behaved as a dutiful husband and used to evade the companyplainant whenever she approached to him he maintained the distance even during nights when asked, the first appellant informed the companyplainant that he was suffering from viral fever the first appellant took treatment in the hospital for two three days, and even after discharge from the hospital, he did number companye closer to the companyplainant the first appellant postponed the nuptial night ceremony and he was number interested in companyhabitation.
The companyplainant left for her parents house and started residing there.
MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR,J. Leave granted.
The police after registering the crime for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code investigated and filed the charge sheet, which culminated in CC No.
Thereafter, the first appellant left India and went to Australia, where he is working as an engineer.
The brief facts leading to this appeal are as under The marriage between the first appellant and the second respondent companyplainant was solemnized at Hyderabad as per Hindu rites and rituals.
The impugned order dated 28.03.2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh in Criminal Petition No.
3302 of 2016, as well as, the criminal proceedings initiated against the appellants in C.C. No.
Hence, this appeal.
