SHANTI DEVI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Akhilesh Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Anurag Dubey, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and Sri B. A. Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to set aside the impugned order dated 16.10.2014, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 6, Mainpuri in S.T. No. 181 of 2011 "State Vs. Vipin", under Sections 498A and 306 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District Mainpuri, pending before the aforesaid court, with a further prayer to stay further proceeding in the aforesaid case.

(3.) Before proceeding to take up the question as to whether the impugned order is erroneous or not, it would be pertinent to refer hear the facts of the case in brief. The opposite party no. 2 Rampal lodged the F.I.R. against the applicant along with two others co-accused alleging therein that his sister Suman Devi (deceased) was married to co-accused Vipin Kumar about 8 years ago. The deceased used to be mentally and physically tormented by her husband Vipin Kumar, co-accused Sobharam(father-in-law), the accused applicant no. 1 Shanti Devi (mother-in-law) and applicant no. 2 Ramvilas. Her husband and father in law after consuming liquor, used to torture her in various ways and demanded Rs. 1,00,000/- to be brought from her parents failing which she would not be left alive. On 17.09.2010 at about 12:00 PM, the deceased called the opposite party no. 2 and told him that her father in law, husband and mother in law and Ramvilas were beating her compelling her to bring money from her parent house and in the meantime somebody had snatched away the mobile phone of her sister and her voice stopped from being heard. After some time Vipin Kumar (husband of the deceased) phoned the opposite party no. 2 and informed that her sister's dead body was kept and he should come to take her dead body. Thereafter the opposite party no. 2 and many people of village went to Jagatpur, where his nephew (Bhanja) Gulshan disclosed that his mother was strangulated to death by his father Vipin, grandfather and grandmother and Tau Ramvilas. On 21.09.2010 at 05:30 PM, the F.I.R. was registered as Crime No. 2190 of 2010 P.S. Kotwali, District Mainpuri, under Section 302 I.P.C. The investigation was made and the charge sheet was submitted against the co-accused Vipin Kumar only (husband) on 17.11.2010 whereon cognizance was taken and trial began, during trial statement of the opposite party no. 2 as PW1, Brijraj Singh as PW2 and Gulshan Kumar (Bhanja of opposite party no. 2) as PW3 have been recorded. Thereafter, the opposite party no. 2 moved an application 26A under Section 319 Cr.P.C. in order to summon the applicants and co-accused Shobharam as co-accused in this case to face trial with the main accused. The said application has been allowed by the impugned order dated 16.10.2014 which has been assailed before this Court in the present proceedings. The submission made by the applicants is that in post mortem report the cause of death of the deceased is reported to be asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging, therefore, the same is nothing but a result of pure suicide. There was no motive of committing such heinous crime. After investigation the charge sheet was submitted only against accused Vipin Kumar while the accused applicant along with other co-accused were exonerated by the investigating officer, the co-accused Shobharam has died on 02.01.2014, even then the trial court has summoned him. The applicant no. 1 is aged about 60 years and suffers from various ailments and applicant no. 2 who is cousin brother of the co-accused Vipin Kumar does not come under definition of family even then he has been falsely implicated, therefore, the impugned order should be set aside.