IN THE HONBLE COURT OF IX METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,

AT MIYAPUR, CYBERABD, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.

CRLMP No: of 2010

In

CC No: of 2008

Between:

Applicant

And

1. wife , D/o. Venkat ,

2. SATYAN, S/o Venkat ,

3. VENKAT, S/o.Koteswara ,

4. PADMAVATI, W/o.V.Venkat .
5. Witness-1,

6. Witness-1,

(The place of occurrence of offence is under jurisdiction of this Honble 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 Honble 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
applicants 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 applicants
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 applicants 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 Honble 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 applicants 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 applicants brother-in-law as accused in the criminal complaint, CC. No. 1280/2008 in
this Honble Court. In contra Respondent No.1 admitted in MC.No.145/2009 on the file
of Honble 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
applicants 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 neighbors 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 neighbors
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 applicants 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 witnesss 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 Honble 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 applicants parents via
phone although the applicants 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 neighbors 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 applicants
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
applicants sister is married and not lived with applicants 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 applicants house for 5 days and
applicants parents demanded the applicant for money. In contra after Respondent No.1
joined with the applicant, Respondent No.1 did not live with applicants parents as said
by the Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.1 was lived only in Bangalore and none of
the applicants relatives were lived in applicants matrimonial home.

3. Applicant humbly submits that respondents gave false statements to the police
with intent to cause conviction to the applicant and to applicants 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 Honble Court to order Police Commissioner level enquiry
for this application.
 P RAY E R

1. Under the aforementioned circumstances, it is prayed that the Honble 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 Honble 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 Honble 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
Honble Supreme Court of India.

3. Respondent No.1 filed affidavit in MC. No.145/2009 on the file of Honble

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
APPL<st1:personname w:st="on">IC</st1:personname>ANT