GANGA SAGAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VINOD Prasad, J. Roop Rekha, daughter of Ram Lal, resident of Purebhan Singh, police station Hussainganj, District Fatehpur, was married to applicant No. 1 Ganga Sagar son of Lala resident of Bhairampur, police station Kotwali, District Fatehpur on 24-5- 2001 according to the Hindu customs and rights. In the marriage her father Ram Lal had given dowry of Rs. 40,000/- cash, Kishan Vikash Patra of Rs. 20,000/-, a sovereign, sewing machine, golden chain, utensils, Almirah, bed etc. However, the husband his parents and other relatives of Roop Rekha not being satisfied with the said dowry started demanding a motorcycle before Bidai ceremony of Roop Rekha. Anyhow, Bidai took place and Roop Rekha went to her in-laws house but there she was tortured for the said demand of motorcycle by her husband Ganga Sagar at the instigation of her father-in-law Lala, elder brother Jaber and his wife Sunita. Ganga Sagar was also alleged to be having an illicit relation with Sunita and therefore, he remained totally unconcerned with Roop Rekha. The demand of motorcycle was repeated before Khichari by the husband which was intimated by Roop Rekha to her parents. On receiving the said information, parents and brother of Roop Rekha reached in- laws house but they were subjected to ignoring and Roop Rekha was turned out of her in-laws house with them, and since then now she is living in her parental house. Her report was denied to be registered by the police hence Roop Rekha dispatched a letter to Superintendent of Police, Fatehpur on 3- 12-2004 but that too was of no avail. Failed in her attempt to get the F. I. R. lodged Roop Rekha on 8- 12-2004 laid a complaint in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Fatehpur as complaint case No. 1081 of 2004, Roop Rekha v. Ganga Sagar and Ors. , for offences under Sections 498-A, 506 I. P. C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. Complainant, Roop Rekha examined herself under Section 200 Cr. P. C. and her witnesses Ram Lal, her father, and Balwant son of Raghunath under Section 202 Cr. P. C. The learned Magistrate finding a prima facie case summoned husband Ganga Sagar, Lala (father-in-law), Jaber (Jeth) and Sunita (Jethani) for offences under Sections 498-A, 506 I. P. C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act vide his order dated 1-6- 2005. Aggrieved by the summoning order, the accused persons Ganga Sagar, Lala, Jaber and Sunita invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr. P. C. through this application for quashing of the aforesaid complaint laid by Roop Rekha respondent No. 2. At the stage of admission itself this application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. was dismissed in respect of husband and father-in-law. However a counter-affidavit was called for in respect of Jaber (Jeth) and Smt. Sunita (Jethani) from respondent No. 2 Roop Rekha as well as from A. G. A. Respondent No. 2 filed a counter-affidavit alongwith stay vacation application. In her counter-affidavit she more or less made the same allegations as that of complaint. The learned Counsel for the applicants did not file any rejoinder affidavit and argued the matter finally on the merits.

(2.) I have heard Sri Pulak Ganguly, learned Counsel for the applicants and Sri D. S. Pandey and Sri D. K. Tiwari, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 2 as well as learned A. G. A.

(3.) I have gone through the record of the case and have looked into the allegations made in the complaint and statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr. P. C. appended alongwith an affidavit by the applicants in this application.