AMRIT LAL GARG Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition has been filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal procedure (hereinafter referred to as Cr. P. C.) against the order dated 28th february, 2008 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi upholding framing of charges against the petitioners under Section 498a of Indian Penal code (hereinafter referred to as IPC ).

(2.) THE brief facts of this case are that the petitioners are the inlaws of the complainant. The complainant was married to Dr. Ritesh Garg son of the petitioners on 29th August, 1999. It is stated that after marriage the newly wed moved to Devengiri in Karnataka for their higher medical studies. After completing the course, husband of the complainant came back to Delhi and joined pgims at Rohtak in July 2001. Complainant also, after completing her course, joined her husband and took up a job there. It is further stated that the relation between the complainant and her husband were not cordial and complainant refused to stay at the rented accommodation at Rohtak. Then she along with her husband shifted to Delhi and stayed at the rented accommodation at Majlis Park, New Delhi - 110 033, as the complainant refused to stay with the petitioners as well. Thereafter the complainant and her husband have been living separately at Ashok Vihar, New Delhi. Since the marital life between the complainant and her husband was not cordial, the husband filed a petition of divorce under Hindu Marriage Act on 16th January, 2004 Thereafter the complainant lodged a complaint before CAW cell on 6th February, 2004 alleging demand of dowry, harassment, torture, mental and physical cruelty against the petitioners, their son and a married daughter.

(3.) ON the basis of said complaint FIR No. 204/2004 under Section 498a, 406 and 34 IPC, PS Preet Vihar was registered. The charge sheet was filed after investigation on 3rd August, 2007. Trial court framed charges under Section 498a, 406, 34 IPC. Aggrieved from the order dated 3rd August, 2007, petitioner preferred criminal revision petition 99/2007. The learned Additional Sessions judge, Delhi vide order dated 28th October, 2007 held that no charges against the sister-in-law are made out, but against the petitioners only a prima facie case under Section 498a IPC is made out, as there were no specific allegations under section 406 IPC against the petitioners.