LAEEK AHMAD Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the arguments advanced by Shri Prem Shankar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Vikrant Gupta, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and Shri B.A. Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State of Uttar Pradesh.

(2.) This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Code') has been moved on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 01.02.2013 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 9, Allahabad, in Case No. 238 of 2012 (Smt. Fahmida Begum v. Laeek Ahmad and others), under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'I.P.C.'), Police Station - Mahila Thana, District - Allahabad.

(3.) The main argument by learned counsel for the applicants is that earlier, the opposite party no. 2, who is wife of accused-applicant no. 1 Laeek Ahmad, had lodged an F.I.R., stating therein that the accused-applicants, soon after the marriage of opposite party no. 2, had started passing disparaging comments with respect to inadequate dowry having been given in the marriage from the parents of opposite party no. 2. Opposite party no. 2 began to be tortured and used to be abused and pushed by the family members of accused-applicant no. 1, who are co-accused in this case. The father-in-law and sister-in-law of the opposite party no. 2 were asking for Rs. 25,000/- cash, colour T.V. and a motorcycle and threatened her that in case her father would not fulfill the said demand of dowry, she would be killed. The other co-accused i.e. sisters of accused-applicant no. 1 were also making demand of colour T.V. and two tolas of gold chain and motorcycle for their brother and on 06.04.2006, the accused-applicant after beating opposite party no. 2, left her at Phoolpur Police Station and fled away from there and said that till the said amount of Rs. 25,000/- was not arranged, she would not be allowed to stay in her matrimonial house. The police has registered a case at Case Crime No. 157C of 2007, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station - Phoolpur, District - Allahabad against the accused-applicants, in which, after investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted and even charge has been framed by the trial court on 04.07.2011, copy of which is annexed at Page Nos. 39 and 40 of the Paper Book. It is further argued that the present case under Section 406 of I.P.C. has been initiated by opposite party no. 2 in order to harass the accused-applicants because she had an opportunity to give statement against the accused-applicant in the earlier trial and could not get the charge modified to one under Section 406 of I.P.C. because the occurrence in the present case is nothing but the same, as in fact, it is a matrimonial dispute out of which a false case under Section 406 of I.P.C. has been made out by opposite party no. 2 only in order to harass the applicants so that they may have to get themselves bailed out again in a fresh case.