MALTI RAI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants namely, Smt. Malti Rai, Smt. Vibha Rai and Manish Rai, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of the Court with prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 19.7.2012, submitted in Case Crime No. 168 of 2012, under Sections 498A , 304B , 323 , 306 , 511 , 313 I.P.C. and 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Lanka, District Varanasi, and the entire proceeding of Case No. 2910 of 2012 (State Vs. Manish Rai and others), arising from Case Crime No. 168 of 2012, P.S. Lanka, District Varanasi.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicants argued that it was a case, wherein, uncle Gajendra Pratap Singh, got case crime number lodged, whereas, subsequently, he came to know that under anxiety, he got this case lodged. It was not a case of dowry death. He has given an affidavit of this fact. The parents, in their statements, have categorically said that no demand of dowry was ever made or dowry death was ever caused, as has been mentioned in counter affidavit filed on record. Even then, charge sheet has been filed and cognizance over it, has been taken. Then after, summoning order is there. Whereas, husband applicant Manish Rai, is 70 per cent disabled and entire expenses of hospital was borne by applicants. Even deceased, in her dying declaration, has not supported case of prosecution. Hence, for ensuring end of justice, this application has been filed with above prayer.