GOPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VINOD Prasad, J. This application has been filed by the applicants Gopal Singh, Chandra Singh, Smt. Sita Devi, Smt. Kusum and Smt. Rajni challenging the proceedings of complaint case No. 4035 of 2005, Smt. Minakshi Devi v. Gopal Singh and Ors. , under Sections 498-A I. P. C. and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Civil Lines, District Aligarh.

(2.) THE factual matrix of the case as is perceptible from the complaint filed by Smt. Minakshi Devi, respondent No. 2, are that she was married on 9-12-2003 with Gopal Singh, applicant No. 1 at Rudra Prayag, Uttaranchal. In the marriage, her parents had given adequate dowry to the applicant No. 1 and his parents. THE applicants accused Gopal Singh, Chandra Singh, Smt. Sita Devi, Smt. Kusum and Smt. Rajni were not satisfied with the dowry and they started harassing the complainant respondent No. 2 for balance amount of Rs. 2,00,000 (Two lac rupees) as dowry. When the father and the brother of the complainant alongwith the uncle of the complainant, namely, Laxman Singh and maternal uncle Satish Singh went to the in-laws house of the complainant respondent No. 2 to bring her back then there also demand of Rs. 2 lac was made by the applicants. However, the complainant was brought back by her father at his house in District Aligarh. It is alleged in paragraph 4 of the complaint that for many years the accused persons did not come to take the complainant back. However, on the assurance given by the father of the complainant for payment of dowry the accused came to Aligarh and there they were handed over Rs. 50,000 by the father of the complainant. After receiving the said money, the accused again reiterated the demand of Rs. 2 lacs at Aligarh as well. THE accused, however, took the complainant with them to Rudra Prayag. Because of insufficient dowry they again started harassing complainant Smt. Minakshi Devi. On 22-2-05, the complainant was turned out from her in-laws house by the accused person. On the said matrix alongwith other allegations the complainant respondent No. 2 Smt. Minakshi Devi laid a complaint in the Court of C. J. M. , Aligarh being complaint case No. 4035 of 2005. THE trial Court recorded the statement of the complainant under Section 200 Cr. P. C. on 23-6-2005 and that of her witnesses P. W. 1 Raghunath Singh (Father of the respondent No. 2), P. W. 2 Anil Chauhan and P. W. 3 Heera Lal under Section 202 Cr. P. C. Finding a prima facie case established, the trial Court summoned the accused applicants vide its order dated 8-8-2005 for offences under Section 498-A I. P. C. and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act. Aggrieved by the aforesaid summoning order, the applicants have filed the present criminal miscellaneous application in this Court.

(3.) LEARNED A. G. A. as well as learned Counsel for the complainant contended that in paragraph 4 of the complaint the complainant had specifically made an averment that the accused-applicants came to Aligarh many times repeated their demand of dowry and they were handed over Rs. 50,000 by the father of the complainant at Aligarh and they had demanded dowry there also and hence the cause of action arose at Aligarh also. They contended that as the torture and demand was made at Aligarh, the Magistrate at Aligarh had rightly entertained the complaint of the complainant.