MD. AKRAM SIDDIQUI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused-appellant not having succeeded in convincing the High Court that the criminal proceeding under Sections 498-A, 323 Penal Code and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Actinstituted against him ought to be quashed has approached this Court by way of thisappeal.

(2.) We have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

(3.) What would required to be taken notice for the purpose of adjudication of the issueraised is the fact that the complainant, who is the wife of the brother of the accused-appellant, had instituted an earlier complaint on 12.07.2005 on virtually the sameallegations. In the said complaint though there is a bald reference to one brother of thehusband who is alleged to have tortured and intimidated the complainant, the saidperson has not been named. The present accused-appellant had also not been named asan accused in the said complaint. Thereafter on 27.08.2005 the FIR out of which theseproceedings have arisen was lodged impleading the accused-appellant as an accused. Areading of the aforesaid FIR would go to show that in substance the allegations made inthe FIR are similar to those contained in the earlier complaint dated 12.07.2005 exceptfor an incident that is alleged to have occurred on 27.08.2005.