Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court has upheld that a second wife too has the right to lodge dowry harassment case against her husband. Justice U. Durga Prasad Rao dismissed a petition by Nalla Thirupathi Reddy seeking to quash the case lodged by his wife under Section 498 (A) of the IPC.
The petitioner challenged the second wife’s locus standi on grounds that she is not his legally wedded wife, but a second wife.
According to the respondent wife, the petitioner married her with the consent of his first wife as she was critically injured in a fire accident. The petitioner was paid Rs 2 lakhs and a piece of land worth Rs 1 lakh at the time of marriage by her parents.
Based on a Supreme Court judgment in A. Subash Babu versus State of Andhra Pradesh case, the judge observed that the petitioner cannot seek quashing of the proceedings merely because the complainant was the second wife. The AP High
In that Suresh Babu case, the Apex Court had ruled that the absence of a definition of “husband” to specifically include such persons who contract marriages ostensibly and cohabit with such woman in the purported exercise of their role and status as “husband” is no ground to exclude them from the purview of Section 304B or 498A IPC.
Citing the above findings, Justice Durga Prasad Rao directed the police to investigate the case.
Plea against toddy shops
Chaya Ratan, former IAS officer, professor P. L. Vishweshwar Rao and two others moved the Hyderabad High Court against the Telangana government’s move to re-start toddy shops in the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation limits, after a gap of 10 years.
They informed the court that the current system of toddy sale is neither beneficial to the common man nor for the toddy tappers. Only the middlemen who make large quantity of adulterated toddy using harmful substances are benefitted.
The petitioners submitted that the previous state government had not permitted toddy shops in Hyderabad since 2004 for want of required trees within 50 kilometers radius.
They contended that the GO issued for “establishment of shops by amending the AP Excise Rules 2007” was illegal and arbitrary.
They urged the court to set aside the GO and direct the authorities to shut down all toddy shops in places where people are opposing them and not to allow setting up of new toddy shops in the city.
Status quo in IFS posting
The Tribunal directed the Centre and state governments of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh to maintain status quo with regard to the services of IFS officer P.S. Raghavaiah, district forest officer of Anantapur district.
A two-member bench comprising M. Kanthaiah (judicial) and Ms Ranjana Chowdary (administration) granted the interim order while hearing a plea by Raghavaiah challenging his allocation to Telangana cadre.
Mohammad Shafiquzzaman, counsel for the petitioner, submitted that under the law a conferred IFS officer has to be allotted his native state invariably, but of the 25 conferred IFS officers of erstwhile united AP, Mr Raghavaiah was the only officer whose option was not considered.
The bench issued notices to the Centre and both the state governments to file their counter affidavits on the plea.
