SHATRUNJAI PUNDIR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of the present C482 application, the applicant has challenged the summoning/cognizance order dtd. 15/11/2022, passed by learned Sixth Additional Civil Judge/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun in Criminal Case No.7459 of 2022, State Vs. Shatrunjai, punishable u/s 498-A, 323 and 504 IPC, arising out of FIR No.106 of 2022 dtd. 28/2/2022, registered with Police Station Raipur, District Dehradun, along with the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case.

(2.) The facts in brief are that the applicant and respondent No.3 got married on 7/10/2019 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. Respondent No.3 on 28/2/2022 lodged an FIR against the applicant and her in-laws alleging that since, the very beginning, applicant and his family were not satisfied with the gifts received and arrangements made in the wedding, because of this reason they used to taunt and humiliate respondent No.3. It is also alleged by respondent No.3 that the applicant used to say that he has no feelings for her and also used to avoid marital cohabitation. She further alleged that her husband is an alcoholic and on 25/10/2019 at around 10:00 AM, when respondent No.3 tried to stop the applicant from taking alcohol, he slapped her and also threatened her of more severe consequences next time, if she ever stops him from drinking. In the FIR, it is also alleged that the in-laws/parents of applicant, used to humiliate respondent No.3 by comparing her to servants working in the house. She also alleged that on 28/10/2019 i.e. only 20 days after marriage, applicant flew to Newzealand and has never returned since then and has treated respondent No.3 and her family members with constant ignorance.

(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the impugned FIR is concocted and is far from truth and is filed just to harass the applicant and his family members and to extort money from them. He submits that respondent No.3 has reluctant and negative behavior and is suffering from mental anxiety, which fact was admitted by respondent No.3. He further submits that applicant and his family members did all possible things to treat her mental illness and treated her with utmost care and affection.