KAMAL SAINI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A whole family consisting of father Roop Singh Saini, (applicant No. 2), his wife Smt. Kassi Devi (applicant No. 3), and their three sons. Kamal Saini (applicant No. 1). Devendra Saini (applicant No. 4) and Kailash Chand Saini (applicant No. 7), wife of Devendra Saini. namely. Smt. Pushpa Devi (applicant No. 5). daughter of Roop Singh Saini and Kassi Devi, namely. Sunita and her husband Ramveer Saini (applicants Nos. 6 and 8) have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the proceeding of Criminal Case No. 495 of 2005, State v. Kamal Saini & Ors., under Section 498 -A. 323. 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act relating to P.S. Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahr pending before the C.J.M., Bulandshahr. Their subsequent prayer is for stay of further proceedings of aforesaid case interregnum.

(2.) INCAPSULATE facts, which have given rise to the present application, are that an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was filed by Sunil Kumar Saini son of Mahesh Singh, resident of Mohalla Kayasthvada. P.S. Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahr in the Court of C.J.M. Bulandshahr being Misc. Application No. 281 of 2004 for offences under Sections 498 -A. 323, 324, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. P.S. Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahr against the present applicants. The allegations levelled were that Mahendri sister of Sunil Kumar Saini, respondent No. 2 was married to Kamal Saini applicant No. 1 on 22 -2 -2004 at Sikandrabad. District Bulandshahr. In the marriage, the father of respondent No. 2 Mahesh Singh had given Rs. 2 lacs as cash, a motor cycle. Refrigerator. T.V., Sofa set, Almirah and 20 Tola of ornaments and utensils etc. as dowry, Smt. Mahendri in her in -laws house was tortured on the ground that in the marriage Rs. 4 lacs cash and a Maruti Car was agreed to be given as dowry but the car and remaining Rs. 2 lacs were not given. Smt. Mahendri made a complaint regarding said demand of dowry and torture to respondent No. 2. Sunil Kumar Saini her real brother. On objection being raised by respondent No. 2. Sunil Kumar Saini, he was also misbehaved with by applicant -accused. For non -fulfillment of dowry. Smt. Mahendri was also assaulted by kicks and fists. On getting the information of assault respondent No. 2 brought her sister back to her parental house. After sometime, her husband Kamal Saini took her back to his house but there the accused again repeated the demand of aforesaid dowry and assaulted Smt. Mahendri for the same so much so that even an attempt to burn her was made by pouring kerosene oil on her. On hue and cry raised by her. she was saved by her neighbours. On 22 -5 -2004 the applicant accused threatened to do away with Smt. Mahendri because of non -fulfilment of dowry in the presence of respondent No. 2 and her father compelling them to bring her back to their house and since then she was living with them. On 2 -6 -2004 at 8.00 a.m. all the accused persons came to the house of respondent No. 2 at Sikandrabad. repeated the demand of dowry, and on inability being shown by her father Mahendra Singh, they assaulted Smt. Mahendri. Their neighbour Jagdish Singh, on hearing the hue and cry, reached on the spot and intervened into the matter. The accused then left the house threatening to kill Smt. Mahendri. Respondent No. 2 Sunil Kumar Saini endeavoured to lodge a F.I.R. against the accused applicants at Police Station Sikandrabad, but failed in his such attempt. He got his father and his sister medically examined in the District Hospital and then dispatched a letter to the S.S.P., Bulandshahr on 4 -6 -2004. Since his efforts of getting the F.I.R. lodged against the applicants went in vain, therefore, the respondent No. 2 resorted to file an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C, in the Court of C.J.M. Bulandshahr on 6 -7 -2004. A copy of the aforesaid application is appended as Annexure -1 to the affidavit filed in support of this application. Under the orders of the C.J.M. case crime No. 12 of 2004, under Sections 498 -A. 323,506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D. P. Act was registered against the applicants on 6 -7 -2004 at 2.20 p.m. at P.S. Sikandarabad District Bulandshahr. The police started the Investigation into the crime but ultimately it found the case to be false land, therefore, it submitted a final report No. 23 of 2004 Annexure No. 2 to the affidavit tiled in support of this application on 3 -4 -2004. The said F.R. was sent to the Circle Officer the same day, but the Circle Officer sent it back for further investigation on 17 -8 -2004. Subsequent investigation was conducted by S.I. Umed Kumar, who opined in the case diary that the dispute is between the spouses who levell allegations against each other. The wife thought that Kamala Saini was an illiterate and brainless and the wife did not want to live in village Gurjardhari as she wanted to live in the City. The husband on the other hand, levelled allegations that his wife got aborted at her brother -in -laws (Jijas) place and was a woman of easy virtues. I.O. further observed that when the applicants went to bring back Smt. Mahendri on 2 -6 -2004, then her relatives refused to send her back and demanded Rs. 6 lacs from the applicants otherwise threatened to falsely implicate them in a false case. I.O. further observed that after getting a false medical report prepared on 3 -6 -2004 a false case was set up by respondent No. 2. His investigation further revealed that on 2 -6 -2004 only the male members of the applicants family had came to take away Smt. Mahendri and not the ladies of the house. Concluding thus the I.O. had filed a final report in the case.

(3.) I have heard Sri Manish Tiwary, learned Counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA.