SURYAKANT NAIDU Vs. RACHNA NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present Petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C, the Petitioners have sought for quashment of the FIR dtd. 21/9/2015 registered in Crime No.227/2015 at P.S Khatgora whereby the Petitioners have been implicated as accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 498-A/34 IPC.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners assailing the registration of the FIR at P.S Katghora submits that the case lodged by the Complainant/Respondent No.1 is totally false and fabricated and has been filed only with an intention to harass the Petitioners for no fault of theirs. He further submits that first of all there is an inordinate unexplained delay in the lodging of the FIR as the date of incident alleged is of 24/8/2015 and the FIR in this case has been recorded on 21/9/2015 which by itself shows the delay in the lodging of the FIR. There is also no plausible explanation given by the Complainant for the delay caused in lodging of the FIR. He further submits that even the documents which have been filed by the Complainant/Respondent No.1 i.e. Exhibits No.A-9 and 10 also are all fabricated documents and have been cooked up only for the purpose of filing of the FIR for getting the offence registered against the Petitioners. He submits that it is also a case where the mala fides on the part of Respondent No.1 stand established from the fact that there was a compromise agreement between the parties entered into before the Family Counselling Center, District Korba held on 12/9/2015. He further submits that prima facie, from the reading of the complaint itself, it would reflect that the ingredients that are required for making out an offence under Sec. 498-A is not available on record. No medical evidence also is adduced by the Complainant to establish the assault part. All the in-laws were separately residing and have been falsely implicated.

(3.) Thus, for all these reasons, the Court below, relied upon the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in AIR 2013 Supreme Court 518 (Dimpey Gujral and Ors. vs. Union Territory Through Administrator, U.T. Chandigarh and Ors.) submitted for quashing of the criminal proceedings.