VEENA Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking setting aside of the order dated 10th August, 2009 passed by the trial Court whereby it allowed an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. filed by the parents of the deceased and impleaded the petitioner, sister in law (Jethani) of deceased, as an accused in FIR bearing No. 381/2007 registered with Police Station Uttam Nagar, Delhi under Sections 498A/304B/34 IPC.

(2.) MR . Anupam S. Sharma, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the impugned summoning order had caused irreparable loss and injury to the petitioner and had taken away her right to live with dignity, honour and reputation. He contended that the trial Court failed to consider that the averments made in the application did not satisfy the conditions prescribed in Section 319 Cr.P.C.

(3.) ACCORDING to Mr. Sharma, as there was no reasonable prospect of the case against the petitioner ending in conviction for the offences concerned, the Court should have refrained from adding her as an accused. In this connection, he relied upon the judgments of the Supreme Court in Michael Machado & Anr. vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. 2000 Crl.L.J. 1706(1); Palanisamy Gounder & Anr. vs. State Represented by Inspector of Police (2006) 1 SCC (Cri.) 568; Kailash vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr., AIR 2008 SC 1564 and Sarabjit Singh & Anr. vs. State of Punjab & Anr., AIR 2009 SC 2792.