RAHUL GUPTA Vs. STATION HOUSE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Matrimonial relations having soured between the couple, the fallout was litigation and exchange of acrimonious allegations. FIR No. 03 of 2023 was registered on 7/1/2023 by the Mahila Thana, Ambikapur, on the complaint made by the wife, Radhika Gupta, respondent No. 7, against the husband, Rahul Gupta, the petitioner, and his family members for offences punishable under Sec. 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [For short, 'IPC'], and Sec. 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 [For short, 'the DP Act']. The petitioner's grievance is that a FIR was not registered on his complaint dtd. 25/12/2023, wherein he had alleged that the complaint and statements made by his wife and her family members amounted to acceptance of their giving dowry and that Sec. 3 of the DP Act criminalized both the 'giving' and the 'taking' of dowry, requiring registration of an FIR against them.

(2.) The petitioner's endeavour to get an FIR registered failed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, and then, in revision, before the learned IV Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur. Thereupon, he approached the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, by way of Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 2754 of 2024, under Sec. 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [For short, 'the BNSS']. However, this attempt also met with failure as the High Court dismissed his petition on 23/4/2025. Aggrieved thereby, he filed the present petition.

(3.) Upon hearing the petitioner, who appears as a party-in-person; the learned senior counsel appearing for the contesting respondents; and the learned counsel for the State of Chhattisgarh, this Court, by order dtd. 22/1/2026, requested Mr. Dhananjaya Mishra, learned counsel, to assist the Court as amicus curiae.