BHARAT GUPTA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of the present C482 application, the applicant has prayed for setting aside the charge sheet dtd. 6/6/2021 as well as cognizance order dtd. 26/3/2022, passed by learned Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun in Criminal Case No.1940 of 2022, State Vs. Bharat Gupta, under Ss. 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC and Sec. 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending in the court of Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun.

(2.) Facts of the case in a nutshell are that applicant is husband of respondent no.2. They got married on 3/11/2014, but after lapse of time acrimony grew between them, due to temperamental differences, on which respondent no.2 left the house of applicant and started living in her parental house. Thereafter on 12/2/2021 respondent no.2 got an F.I.R. registered against the applicant and his family members with the allegations of cruelty on account of demand of dowry. On the basis of said F.I.R. a case was registered under Ss. 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Sec. 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. As the offences were less than seven years, therefore, the Investigating Officer did not arrest the applicant and his family members and issued notices under Sec. 41-A of Cr.P.C. to them. Applicant and his family members appeared before the Investigating Officer and after investigation, the Investigating Officer did not find any case against the family members of applicant, but submitted a charge sheet dtd. 6/6/2021 against the applicant under the aforesaid Sec. before learned Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun. On the basis of said charge sheet learned Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun took cognizance against the applicant on 26/3/2022 and a Criminal Case No.1940 of 2022, State Vs. Bharat Gupta was registered against him. After receiving the summon, issued by learned Magistrate, the applicant appeared before the trial court and he was released on bail by the trial court. Feeling aggrieved by the said order dtd. 26/3/2022 the applicant is before this Court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the Investigating Officer did not investigate the matter properly and in a routine manner. Respondent no.2 filed a false complaint against the applicant under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 for harassment of applicant and his family members. The F.I.R. registered by respondent no.2 against the applicant is a concocted one and holds no water.