ANUPAM VASHISHTH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this revision is to the order dated 15.4.2010 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh in Case no. 263/12/2009 Jamuna Prasad Vs. Anupam Vashishta and others and later case no. 2247 of 2010 whereby the protest petition filed by opposite party no. 2 against final report submitted by the police in case crime no. 207/09 u/s 304-B, 498-A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act P. S. Banna Devi, Aligarh had been allowed and rejecting the final report cognizance against revisionists has been taken u/s 190(1)(b) Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) Facts germane to the revision are that the opposite party no. 2 filed an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh on 3.2.2009 wherein he stated that the marriage of his daughter Reena was solemnized with accused Anupam Vashishtha on 20.3.2006 in Aligarh and he spent Rs. 8.0 lacs in the marriage. The accused persons demanded a Honda City car at the time of marriage, else they would not marry. However, after much persuasion the marriage was performed. The accused persons after marriage pressurized Reena to get Honda City car from her parents and they used to abuse, maltreat, beat and extended threat to kill her. She narrated all this to her parents. She also told them that her husband had illicit relations with other woman at Ghaziabad and when she protested she was beaten by him saying that she should arrange Honda City car from her father, else he would not keep her. On 20.12.2006 Reena gave birth to a male child and in chhochhak a sum of Rs.50,000/- were spent and that time also accused demanded Honda City car from the complainant. Her husband who is employed as Engineer in L.G. Company continued his demand. Several times the complainant along with his wife went to House no. 213H, Sector-17, Vasundhara, Ghaziabad to resolve the issue where accused persons also assembled, but on 17.7.2007 Anupam changed his residence and shifted in House no. 32, Sector-19, Vasundhara, Ghaziabad. Whenever, the complainant tried to lodge the report, Reena said that there is improvement in Anupam but he continued to hatch conspiracy in eliminating her. On 12.6.2008 the complainant along with his family had gone for Vaishno Devi darshan and after return on 19.6.2008 they got information that Reena had died. When the complainant reached Mathura, the accused persons showed them discharge slip and death certificate of Fortis Hospital and said that Reena had died during surgery. After her cremation they returned back to Aligarh along with Reena's son. On account of Reena's death the complainant and his family were in shock and trauma and on further enquiry they came to know that she was firstly admitted in Kaushambi Hospital on 6.6.2008 but her husband suo motu got her discharged on 9.6.2008 and in critical condition she was kept at home. When her condition further deteriorated then in order to save him and misguide them he admitted her in Fortis Hospital, Noida in the night of 14/15.6.2008, where she died. The complainant further contended that under a conspiracy due to non-fulfillment of dowry demand, in order to grab insurance money and on account of illicit relations of Anupam with other women, Reena had been killed by the accused persons. The report of the complainant was not taken by the police. On 1.2.2009 at about 5 p. m. accused Avinash Chandra Sharma, SI Paras Ram Singh Yadav of Hathras along with 5-6 persons came at the house of complainant and tried to snatch Reena's son Yash. On hue and cry several persons gathered there and accused persons beat his wife with kicks and fists and threatened to death if Yash is not handed over to them. The complainant reported this incident to D.M., S.S.P. And Inspector of P.S. Banna Devi. The complainant has mentioned that on 31.12.2008 he had also moved an application to C.O., Banna Devi, who passed orders for taking legal action, but the police had colluded with the accused persons and they are pressurizing for compromise. On this application, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh vide order dated 26.2.2009 directed the police to register and investigate the case. The investigation was conducted by S.O. Sunil Kumar Singh who recorded the statements of witnesses, visited the house of accused Anupam in Vasundhara (Ghaziabad) and collected information regarding ailment and treatment of the deceased and after completing the same submitted final report in the case, which was registered as case no. 263/12/2009 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh. On notice of final report, the complainant filed protest petition and after hearing his counsel, the learned Magistrate rejected the final report through impugned order and took cognizance against the accused persons, who are husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law, brother-in-law and sisters-in-law of the deceased. Aggrieved, the revisionists have come up in revision.

(3.) I have heard Sri D.S. Misra, learned counsel for the revisionists, Sri Rajesh Yadav, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri R.A. Misra, learned AGA for the State and perused the original record of the case carefully.