VIRENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD . By means of this petition, moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short Cr.P.C.), the petitioners have sought quashing of the order dated 13.08.2010, passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court, Kashipur, in Sessions Trial No. 210 of 2009, whereby exercising power under section 319 of Cr.P.C. said court has summoned the petitioners namely Virendra Kumar and his wife Sudesh in the trial.

(2.) REJOINDER affidavit and counter affidavit have already been exchanged. Delay Condonation Application No. 25 of 2011 stands allowed. Rejoinder affidavit is taken on record.

(3.) HAVING gone through the statement of P.W. 1 Anu Devi and P.W. 2 Smt. Vimla, this court finds that the trial court has wrongly summoned the petitioners to face the trial. It is admitted by P.W. 1 in her cross examination that accused Sachin Kumar belongs to a different caste and even his caste is known to the witness. P.W. 2 Vimla Devi in her cross examination has admitted that she never went to the matrimonial house of Priya nor she cared to go to Kashipur even after her death. She also admitted that even Sachin Kumar never came to her house. She did not attend the love marriage between Sachin Kumar and Priya. Their bald statements in respect to petitioners who were not accused in charge sheet should not have been acted upon for the purpose of section 319 Cr.P.C., in a case of dowry harassment where there was an inter -caste marriage and parents lived separately.