MANOJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two petitions seeking setting aside of the orders dtd. 26/8/2022, 31/8/2022 and 17/9/2022 passed by the learned MM (Mahila Court-02), East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, in Case No 1123/2019 in FIR No. 353/2017, whereby the charges were framed against the revisionists/petitioners u/s 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

(2.) The circumstances in which the present petitions arise are that the marriage between Ms. Anju Kumari/R-2 and Mr. Puneet Kumar/P-1 (in Crl.Rev 49/2023) was solemnized on 29/5/2014 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. A son was born out of wedlock. Pursuant to a complaint by R-2/complainant with the CAW Cell, East District, a FIR No.353/17 dtd. 30/9/2017 was registered against namely i) Mr. Puneet Kumar, ii) Mr. Komal Singh/father-in-law (P-2 in Crl.Rev 49/2023), iii) Mrs. Santosh Devi/mother-in-law (P-2 in Crl.Rev 48/2023), iv) Mr. Manoj Kumar/elder brother-in-law (P-1 in Crl.Rev 48/2023), v) Mr. Sumit@Sunny/younger brother-in-law of R-2; alleging that R-2 has suffered cruelty and harassment at the hands of the said persons because of repeated demands of dowry. She further alleged that they have usurped her stridhan, which was and continues to be in their possession.

(3.) Thereafter, the learned Trial Court on 26/8/2022 while relying on the case of UOI v Prafulla Kumar Samal (1979) 3 SCC 4 discharged Mr. Sumit Kumar@Sunny stating that from the perusal of the complaint and the statement of R-2 under sec. 164 the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.PC), no specific allegation is raised against him. However, it records that in light of the observations and discussions raised, sec. 498A/406/34 is attracted against the present petitioners and hence charges are to be framed against them. The relevant portion of the order dtd. 26/8/2022 reads, inter-alia, as under: