SURENDER KUMAR ARORA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Cr.P.C.' for short) for quashing of FIR No.90/2012 under Section 498A/406/34 IPC, P.S. Nanakpura, Delhi by father-in-law and mother-in-law of respondent No.2/complainant.

(2.) The case of the petitioners is that the complainant got married with the son of the petitioners, Ankit Arora in Delhi in the year 2011. The son of the petitioners is a British National and a permanent resident of London. After marriage in Delhi, the complainant and her husband stayed with the petitioners for four days only and thereafter they never stayed with the petitioners. Subsequently, some differences arose between the complainant /respondent No.2 and her husband. The husband of respondent No.2 filed a petition for dissolution of marriage in the Court at London on 23.2.2012. A certificate of entitlement decree was passed by the U.K. Court at U.K. on 9.5.2012 which was followed by a decree nisi dated 19.6.2012 and the same was finally made absolute on 6.9.2012. In order to wreck vengeance against the petitioners, the complainant lodged FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC on 23.7.2012.

(3.) It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that even if the averments made by the complainant in the complaint are taken on their face value, even then the entire cause of action has arisen at U.K., that being so, the police station at Delhi had no jurisdiction to register the case. Counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on L.N. Mukherjee v. State of Madras, 1961 AIR(SC) 1589 and Mohan Baitha & Ors. v. State of Bihar and Anr., 2001 4 SCC 350. It is also submitted that the complainant/respondent No.2 filed a list before U.K. Court for financial settlement and CAW Cell in India. There is huge discrepancy between both the lists. The allegations against the petitioners are quite vague.