JOIN USThe daughter-in-law of an Andhra Pradesh High Court judge lodged a complaint against her husband and family with the Chennai police commissioner on a charge of dowry harassment. An allegation which was refuted by her husband.
According to the complaint, Kavya Rao (30) married B Ramakrishna, the judge’s son, in 2007. After marriage, the couple lived in Bangalore till Ramakrishna lost his job in 2008. Kavya alleged that her in-laws began harassing her when she and her jobless husband moved to Hyderabad.
She told police that her family had paid more than Rs 40 lakh as dowry, but her husband’s family demanded another Rs 50 lakh.
As her parents could not pay the amount, she was harassed frequently by her in-laws, which forced her to come to live with her father in Chennai. Later, her father-in-law lodged a false police complaint against her father, she said.
“My in-laws, in their complaint, said that my father had stolen valuables from their house,” Kavya said and alleged that her father-in-law was influencing the police personnel even in Chennai.
On January 13, based on information received from Andhra Pradesh Police, Kavya and her father were summoned by the Chennai Police in connection with a case that she had stolen her father-in-law’s ancestral jewellery.
Meanwhile, Ramakrishna, who’s pursuing PhD at IIT New Delhi, refuted his wife’s allegations.
According to family sources, Ramakrishna maintains that the issue of dowry harassment never came up in the communication he had with his wife through emails in the past several months.
“Moreover she (Kavya) has recently sent a draft note of a mutual consent divorce petition. One of the conditions in that draft note was that there will be no mutual giving and taking between the two at the time of divorce”.
Incidentally, Ramakrishna filed a complaint at Jinnaram Police Station in Medak district on November 23 against Kavya’s family members alleging that they were threatening him with dire consequences and abusing him.
According to him, his wife and in-laws were not allowing him to see his child. Besides, a case had been filed at Medak court for restitution of conjugal rights and custody of his three-year old daughter. The decision on that issue is pending.