AAGOSTE IRAM Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PARDESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Case No.164 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No.337 of 2014, under Sections 498A, 326A, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., read with Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Sambhal, District-Sambhal, pending in the Court of Juvenile Justice Board, Moradabad.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the records.

(3.) Some background facts in brief are that the applicant is the unmarried sister-in-law 'Nanad' of O.P. No.2. The O.P. No.2, lodged an F.I.R. on 18.6.2014, under Sections 498A, 323, 326A,504 and 506 I.P.C., read with Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, against her husband and inlaws including the applicant with general allegations against all of them of dowry demand and harassment in connection thereof. The police after investigation, submitted charge-sheet against all other accused persons except the present applicant who was a minor on the date of occurrence and also on the date of lodging of the F.I.R. However, she was later on summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C., 1973 to face trial with other accused persons. Against the order of the learned trial court allowing the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C., 1973 the applicant filed Criminal Revision No.2744 of 2015 before this Court and this Court, vide order dated 25.4.2016 dismissed the revision observing that the applicant may claim juvenility before the trial court by moving an application under Section 7-A of the Juvenile Justice Act. The applicant moved an application before the trial court and the learned trial court, vide order dated 11/11/2016, declared the applicant a juvenile. Thereafter, the file of the applicant was separated and sent to Juvenile Justice Board for trial. Meanwhile, the trial of the rest of the accused persons pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, concluded and all of them were acquitted of the charges because none of the witnesses supported the prosecution case and all of them turned hostile. However, the applicant's trial could not be proceeded for the reason of her marriage and pregnancy, due to which she could not appear before the Juvenile Justice Board. As she had attained majority, in the meantime, coercive measures were issued against her by the Juvenile Justice Board, which are still continuing.