TRIBHAN SINGH Vs. SOMVATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed for quashing of the complaint in Criminal Case No. 566 of 1982, under Sections 147 and 323 I.P.C., pending against the applicants in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Agra, on the ground that the complaint is false, frivolous and vexatious. The complaint was filed by Opp. Party No. 1 Smt. Somvati against the applicants, and others under Sections 147 and 323 1.P.C. with the allegations that Opp. Parties used to ask the applicant to bring money from her parents. She was often beaten by the applicants and they treated her with cruelty. On the day of incident, i.e. 17.12.1981, all the accused assaulted her with kicks and fists. On hearing her cries Kali Charan, Chhavi Ram, Kailashi, Jai Singh, Natthi and Suresh attracted to the scene of occurrence and they rescued her. Her report was not taken down by the Police of P.S. Nibora saying that it was a family dispute and did not require interference by the Police. Thereafter she sent an application to S.P. and a copy to S.S.P., Agra on 18.12.1981.

(2.) The complainant Opp. Party No. 1 examined herself and her witnesses under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate found a pritma facie made out against the accused-applicants and accordingly he summoned them by the order dated 30.1.1982. The main contention of the learned Counsel for the applicants is that the husband had already lodged a report on 14.4.1981 under Section 498 I.P.C. against one Lakhan Singh who was having an affair with Opp.Party No. 1 and had taken her away and that she has been living with him. The present complaint has been filed in retaliation of that F.I.R. to pressurize the applicants so that they may not have Lakhan Singh and Opp. Party No. 1 arrested. Learned Counsel for the applicants also stated that the assertions made in the affidavit filed in support of the application are uncontroverted as no counter affidavit has been filed by Opp. Party No. 1.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the applicants also relied on the case State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal reported in AIR 1992 S.C. 604 in support of his contention that the allegation made in the F.I.R. or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable that on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach to a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused and the criminal proceedings instituted against them are manifestly ntalafide and malacious with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused with a view to spite them due to personal grudge.