SAVITRY DEVI Vs. RAMESH CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though State has the locus standi to prefer such petitions, since petitioner is the wife and on her complaint case was registered and charge- sheet was filed, and has grievance against the order dated 13.3.2002 passed by Ms. Nisha Saxena, Metropolitan Magistrate this is being entertained.

(2.) Vide impugned order charge for the offence punishable under Section 406, IPC for misappropriation of dowry articles and istridhan was framed against her husband only and her father-in-law, brothers-in-law and sister-in-law (wife of of one of the brothers of her husband) and her unmarried sister-in-law were discharged and charge for the offence under Section 498A, IPC i.e. harassment of the wife by the husband and his relatives for inadequate dowry or non-fulfilment of demands of dowry was framed against the husband and father-in-law alone. According to the petitioner/wife., every member of the family though the elder brother of the husband died during the proceedings should have been subjected to trial for both the offences viz offence under Section 498A, IPC as well as 406, IPC.

(3.) The allegations in brief are that after marriage her in-laws specially her father-in-law and her husband and the brother-in-law did not like the dowry articles and expressed their unhappiness that they were not given Hero Honda and cash of Rs. 50,000/-. The wife of elder brother of her husband Ms. Mukesh and the sister of her husband did not like the clothes given for them and Ms. Mukesh represented that if Sanjay had married her younger sister then he would have got more dowry. The main allegations of harassment were against the husband and father-in-law. There werenoallegationsof demand of dowry against other relatives.