BHUSHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of present criminal misc. application u/s 482 Cr.P.C., applicants seek to quash the summoning order dated 16.1.2013 passed by Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun as well as the complaint case no.135 of 2011 Smt. Puja Rani v. Anuj Kumar and others, under Sections 323, 498-A of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that respondent no.2 filed an application in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. stating therein that she got married with the applicant Anuj Kumar on 19.02.2009. In the marriage, her father gave sufficient dowry. Soon after marriage, the applicants started making taunt for bringing insufficient dowry. Her husband also started abusing and beating her. When the complainant told her mother about the harassment meted out to her at the hand of the applicants, her father gave a motorcycle to her husband but even then the applicants did not satisfy. The complainant further alleged that the behaviour of the applicants did not change and even their demands started rising day by day. One day, her husband left her at her parental house and told that he will take her back when the demand of Bullet will be fulfilled. She further stated that she and her parents kept quite thinking that their behaviour would change but their behaviour did not change. Thereafter on the persuasion of her in-laws her husband came to take her back on which date her mother gave her husband a gold chain and some cash money. Her younger sister also accompanied her to her house. She further stated that for sometime behaviour of the applicants remained normal but on 16.02.2010 the applicants came in their room and got obtained her and her sister's signatures in a compromise. After this incident, the applicant came back to her parental house. On 18.09.2010 her father-in-law gave a call on telephone and asked that if her parents are ready to give rupees one lakh then the complainant would be taken back. On the basis of complaint, criminal complaint case no.135 of 2011 was registered under Sections 323, 498-A of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. In support of complaint, the respondent no.2-complainant got examined herself u/s 200 of Cr.P.C. Sarla Devi was examined u/s 202 of Cr.P.C. The complainant filed certain documents in documentary evidence. On a perusal of the evidence available on record, Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun summoned the applicants to face trial under Section 323, 498-A of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicant Bhushan Lal is father-in-law, Smt. Santosh Devi is mother-in-law and Km. Sarla is unmarried sister-in-law of the petitioner whereas the applicant Anuj Kumar is husband of respondent no.2. Due to some matrimonial discord between respondent no.2 and applicant Anuj Kumar, entire family has been roped in the instant case, which is nothing but abuse of process of law. He would further submit that the respondent no.2 on her own volition is willing separately from the applicant, which fact can be verified from the counseling report which took place between the parties in the police station, where the respondent no.2 did not make a single allegation against the applicants for demand of dowry. She also stated that she is not interested to live with her husband and that she does not want to initiate any legal proceeding against her in-laws.