SAMA ISHAKBHAI MAHEBUBBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been preferred with prayer to quash and set aside the criminal complaint being FIR M Case No.1 of 2016 dtd. 2/3/2016, registered with Radhanpur Police Station, Patan for the offence punishable under Ss. 498(A), 494, 496, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code as well as other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the present petitioners.

(2.) The report of the Police Inspector,Radhanpur Police Station has been filed by learned APP with the statement recorded of Pravinabanu daughter of Nurmohamad Chauhan, dtd. 5/1/2023. As per the report, the complainant - Pravinbanu Wife of Nurmahamad Sama had moved before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Radhanpur by filing a Criminal Inquiry No.06 of 2016 and the Hon'ble Court by outward (Javak) No.240 of 2016, dtd. 1/3/2016 had passed an order for an inquiry under Sec. 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, and the report thus states that in pursuance of the order on 2/3/2016, at about 16.30 hours, the offence came to be registered.

(3.) Mr. Y.J.Patel, learned advocate referring to the facts of the case stated that the parties to the disputes belong to the Muslim community, hence, Ss. 494 and 496 of the Indian Penal Code would not be attracted in the matter. He further stated that earlier a criminal complaint as C.R.No.II- 3069 of 2011 was filed and after leading the evidence, all the accused persons came to be acquitted vide an order dtd. 26/8/2014 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Patdi, and against that, the complainant had preferred an appeal under Sec. 378 of the Cr.P.C.; while the said order of acquittal was confirmed by an order dtd. 6/12/2014 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dharngadhra and subsequently again, the respondent No.2 moved before the J.M.F.C. Patan, where the order under Sec. 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. was passed, which Mr.Patel stated that, it was bad in law; and submitted that learned Magistrate ought to have kept the complaint before him and should have made his own inquiry, then the fact would have been detailed out that earlier on the very same ground the complaint was filed, and the ground as raised under Sec. 498A and 3 of the IPC and 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Criminal Case No.145 of 2013 was filed; and on 26/8/2014, Judicial Magistrate, First Class, acquitted the accused and the same order was confirmed on 6/12/2014 in Criminal Appeal No.12 of 2014 by Additional Sessions Judge, Dhrangadhra.