SUBHADRA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these reusion petitions arise out of the order of framing of charge by the Metropolitan Magistrate in a case being tried by him under Sections 498-A and 4061PC. Some of the facts which are relevant for the purposes of deciding this petition are; That Shri Shiv Kumar. who is the brother of the petitioners in CrI.R. 111/95 and nephew of the petitioner in Crl.R. 156/95, was married to the complainant, Smt. Usha according to Hindu rites, in Delhi on 1st July, 1990; Both, the complainant as well as Shri Shiv Kumar. were employed as trained graduate teachers with the Directorate of Education, Govt. of Delhi. Due to some matrimonial discord, the complainant left the matrimonial home and on March 5, 1992 lodged a report with Crime Against Women Cell at Seelampur alleging that Shri Shiv Kumar and his family members including the petitioners had been harassing her by demanding dowry and had also not returned her istridhan which was cntrusted to them after marriage. On the basis of the complaint and the subsequent report dated 20th July, 1992. case FIR No.430/92 was registered against Shri Shiv Kumar and other relatives under Section 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code. After the challan had been filed by the police, the trial Court vide impugned order dated 15th February, 1995 framed charges against the petitioners only under Section 498-A 1PC, no charge against them was framed under Section 4061PC.

(2.) The petitioners being aggrieved of the said order of framing charge under Section 498A against diem have filed the present petition for quashing the same. .

(3.) The contention of the petitioner is that whilc petitioner No.l in Crl.R.111/95 was marriead in 1986 much earlier than the marriage other brother Shiv Kumar with the complainant and was living outside Delhi at the relcvant time; petitioner No.2 was married in June 1991. Both the said petitioners were living separately from the complainant and her husband at the relevant time and the contention is that there areno allegations against either of the petitioners regarding demand of dowry. With a view to appreciate the contentions of the petitioner, it will be useful to note the contents of the complaints as well as investigation which has been carried out by the police.