ZEBA KHALIL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -These two writ petitions are related to each other and we propose to decide them together.

(2.) NECESSARY facts may be stated to get the hang of the controversy. In both the writ petitions the main respondent is Arsi Yusuf (wife) arayed as respondent No. 4 in Writ Petition No. 822 of 2000 and respondent No. 5 in Writ Petition No. 5159 of 2002. Nadeem Khalil (husband) is petitioner No. 5 in Writ Petition No. 822 of 2000 and petitioner No. 1 in Writ Petition No. 5159 of 2002. Khalil Ahmad Khan-father of Nadeem Khalil is petitioner No. 2 in both the writ petitions. Other remaining petitioners in the two writ petitions are other family members and relatives of Nadeem Khalil (husband). In Writ Petition No. 822 of 2000, the petitioners sought the quashing of the F.I.R. dated 30.1.2000 in Case Crime No. 32 of 2000 under Sections 498A/323/504/506/307, I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act as well as stay of their arrest. The copy of the F.I.R. is Annexure-5 to Writ Petition No. 822 of 2000. Nadeem Khalil (husband) filed his own affidavit in support of the said writ petition. As per the averments contained in the writ petition. Arsi Yusuf was married to Nadeem Khalil in November, 1998, but marital relations did not go smooth and divorce was allegedly effected through a talaqnama dated 12.12.1999. Nadeem Khalil however, allegedly received threats from Arsi Yusuf on phone that unless the petitioner paid an amount of Rs. 5 lacs, they would be implicated falsely in various criminal cases. Nadeem Khalil filed a civil suit in the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.), Aligarh, being O.S. No. 106 of 2000, praying for a decree that she be restrained from claiming herself to be his wife and not to enter his house. However, she lodged the instant F.I.R. against the petitioners at P. S. Khatauli, district Muzaffarnagar, making the following false allegations : ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]...

(3.) ON 11.2.2000, this Court stayed the arrest of the petitioners of Writ Petition No. 822 of 2000 in the aforesaid case crime directing the issuance of notices and asking for counter and rejoinder-affidavits. However, the investigation was ordered to continue and the petitioners were directed to make themselves available to the Investigating Officer for interrogation whenever required.