MANBHAWATI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three applicants Manbhawati, her husband Ram Narayan Dubey and their son Manoj Kumar have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court, under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of criminal Proceeding of criminal case No. 524 of 2003 State v. Ram Narayan and Ors. under Sections 498-A, 323,504 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act pending before Court of Judicial magistrate 1st District Jaunpur. The secondary prayer is for stay of further proceeding of the aforesaid case pendent lite.

(2.) The facts of the case in nutshell are that Manoj Kumar Dubey applicant was married with respondent No. 2 Smt. Soni, who is the informant of crime number 524 of 2003, under Section 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act P.S. Baksha District Jaunpur. The FIR (Annexure No. 1) of the said crime number was lodged by her on 10.11.2003 at 12.40 PM in respect of an incident dated 5.10.03 at 8 AM. The said FIR mentioned four persons as accused, the three applicants and the daughter of applicants No. 1 and 2 namely Kanchan. The synopsized allegations were that the informant Smt. Soni was married with Manoj Kumar Dubey son of applicants No. 1 and 2 and brother of Kanchan since last five years. The father of respondent No. 2, informant, had died when she was young. She was tortured for a motorcycle and money by the applicants after the marriage. On the date and time of incident 5.10.2003 at 8 A.M. she was poured with kerosene oil by the accused and on her hue and cry Uma Shankar Dubey and Suraj Dubey etc. reached on the spot and saved her. That day itself she was turned out of their house by the applicants. A Panchayat was convened but the attempt of compromise failed. The informant got herself medically examined in the district hospital Jaunpur. On the said allegations she had lodged the FIR mentioned before. The police after usual investigation submitted a charge sheet against the applicants No. 1 and 2 Smt. Manbhawati and Ram Narayan Dubey on 26.12.2003 under the aforementioned sections vide charge sheet number 114 of 2003 in the concerned court of the Magistrate. The Magistrate took the cognizance of the offence on 22.3.04 against the two accused applicants number 1 and 2. A subsequent charge sheet was submitted by the police against respondent No. 3 Manoj Kumar Dubey on 24.2.04 in his absentia. Meanwhile the parties the informant Smt. Soni and the charge sheeted accused Smt. Manbhawati, Ram Narayan Dubey and Manoj Kumar Dubey came to terms and entered into a compromise with the help of some respectable persons and therefore the informant Smt. Soni filed an application, annexure No. 4, before the Magistrate on 5 2.05 that the aforesaid charge sheet against the accused be quashed. The learned Magistrate- Judicial Magistrate, Ist Jaunpur vide it's order dated 21.1.2006 rejected the said application filed by Smt. Soni informant on the ground that the proceeding under Section 82, 83 Cr.P.C. for attachment is going on against the accused applicant No. 3 and but for offence under Section 323 IPC rest of the offences are not compoundable, vide annexure No. 5 to the affidavit. Hence this application by the accused persons for quashing of the aforesaid proceeding pending against them.

(3.) I have heard Sri P.N. Tripathi advocate on behalf of applicants and Sri T.N. Tiwari advocate on behalf of respondent No. 2, informant Smt. Soni and the learned AGA at a great length and perused the record of the case.