AKIL AHMAD Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State and Mr. RS Sammal, Advocate for the complainant/respondent no. 2.

(2.) By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, CrPC), the petitioner has prayed for quashing the summoning order dated 17.11.2006 as well as the entire the proceedings of in Criminal Case No. 805/2006 State v. Akil Ahmad & Anr. under Section 498A & 506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, District Nainital.

(3.) Facts, in brief, are that the respondent no. 2 Smt. Sabeena Begam filed a complaint against the petitioners and other co- accused before the Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani with the averments that she was married to petitioner no. 1 Akil Ahmad on 4.10.2002 as per Muslim rites and her father had spent about three lakhs rupees in the marriage. But soon after the marriage, the petitioners and the other co-accused started harassing her for dowry and they also committed marpit with her on many occasions. They demanded Rs. 50,000/- and threatened for life in case of non-fulfillment of the said demand. She also gave birth to a female child on 8.6.2004 and thereafter the petitioners and other co-accused increased the harassment. On 8.7.2006, petitioner no. 2 left the victim at her maternal house and ever since then she has been living there and the petitioners and the other co-accused are threatening her family members for the dowry. She has earlier approached to the police but no action was taken. Consequent upon the said complaint, JM, Haldwani directed the police station to lodge the FIR. Thereafter an FIR was lodged against the petitioners and the other co-accused under Section 498A, 506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. After the investigation police submitted the chargesheet against the present petitioners, on the basis of which learned Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani issued the summoning order dated 17.11.2006 against the petitioners.