ISHWAR KUMAR LAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Applicants are facing trial in Case No. 6373 of 2008 (State versus Ishwar Kumar Lal and others) pending in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate VI, Kanpur Nagar arising out of Case crime no.898 of 2008 under section 498-A IPC & Section D.P. Act, P.S. Kalyanpur, District Kanpur Nagar. After registration of the FIR investigation in the matter was initiated. Subsequently, a charge sheet has been filed before the court concerned in which process has been issued against the accused persons. Vide order dated 10.5.2009, this Court directed that no coercive process should be initiated against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

(2.) The allegations contained in the FIR are that respondent no. 2 Madhu Lal was married to applicant no. 1 on 19.11.2000. Out of this wedlock, one son was born. After marriage, the complainant was living with the applicant no. 1 at District Jamnagar, Gujarat. It is contended that from the investigation it was revealed that the applicants were harassing respondent no. 2 physically as well as mentally, as a consequence of the harassment, she aborted a child. There is no mention in the FIR that any demand of dowry was made by the applicants. In her statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. the same allegations are repeated that she was tortured physically as well as mentally. She has further stated that the applicants did not permit her to go to her parental house at Kanpur. It is further revealed from her statement that the applicants told her that she would be treated like this as promise made by her father was not fulfilled. On the occasion of marriage of her sister, she went to Kanpur and stayed there with her parents. It is alleged that on 4.9.2008, her husband, brother-in-law and one Mukta Prasad came inside her parental house. It is stated that the said accused persons told the father of the non-applicant that she will be treated in the same way as she failed to bring the dowry.

(3.) In the statement recorded by her father the same story is repeated. From the statement of the witnesses it clearly reveals that the FIR was filed on 20.9.2008 while the date of incident is 11.11.2000. The facts, as are revealed from the FIR and from the statements of the witnesses, reflect the following things: