RAKESH RAJBIHARI KHUSHWAHA Vs. INDIRA RAKESH KHUSHWAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ application under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:

(2.) The facts giving rise to this writ application may be summarized as under:

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. R.C. Kakkad appearing for the writ applicant submits that the marriage the marriage between the writ applicant and the accused No.1 was solemnized on 21/12/2008 as per the Hindu rites and rituals and, thereafter, they started residing together under one roof as husband and wife. However, after sometime, disputes cropped up between the writ applicant and the accused No.1 and they got separated. Therefore, the accused No.1 filed a complaint against the writ applicant under Sec. 498A etc. of the IPC and the writ applicant also filed a private complaint against the accused No.1-wife and his brother under Ss. 379, 380, 312, 316, 506 read with Sec. 114 of the IPC on 19/4/2010 and on the very same day, the verification of the complainanthusband was also recorded. He further submits that before filing of the private complaint, the complainant-husband had made an application in the form of a complaint before the concerned police station which was pending and, therefore, the learned Magistrate ordered the investigation of both the complaints to be carried out together and sought opinion of the concerned Investigating Officer under Sec. 202 of the Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the investigation was carried out and ultimately, at the end of day, the concerned investigating officer submitted a detailed report before the Magistrate which was partly accepted by he learned Magistrate and issued process against the original accused persons under Ss. 406, 506(2) and 114 of the IPC and without properly considering the materials available on record, the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused persons from the charges levelled against them vide order dtd. 30/10/2017. The said order was then challenged by the original complainant by filing a revision application before the learned Sessions Court, and the learned Sessions Judge also, without taking into consideration the materials available on record in its true spirit, dismissed the said revision application and confirmed the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara dtd. 30/10/2017 by observing that there was a delay in filing the private complaint as also the same is nothing but a counter blast to the complaint filed by the wife under Sec. 498A etc. of the IPC and, therefore, the same is required to be quashed and set aside.