LAWS(BOM)-2007-8-189

SAU ARCHANA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On August 22, 2007
SAU.ARCHANA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Returnable forthwith. Heard Finally with consent of parties.

(2.) THIS is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order of issue of process. The applicants hereinafter shall be referred to as accused and non-applicant no. 2 as complainant.

(3.) COMPLAINANT had instituted a criminal complaint case in the court of Judicial Magistrate (F. C.), under Section 312 of the Indian Penal Code. Complainant was married to accused no. 1 on 22/5/2005. Accused no. 2 to 6 are the relatives of accused no. 1 being parents, brothers and sisters. The complainant and accused no. 1 started residing together at the house of elder brother of the complainant. They were happily living with the complainant's elder brother. The accused no. 1 became pregnant. She was being taken care of by the complainant and his family. She was taken to Dr. Kambale. In the last week of August, 2005, they came to know that accused no. 1 was pregnant. In the meanwhile, a message was received on telephone that accused no. 3 had suffered a fracture and request was made to send accused no. 1 to the house of accused no. 2. Accordingly, accused no. 1 went to the house of accused no. 2 i. e. her father for two purposes, one - to meet her mother, and, second- to have a rest. On 4/9/2005, the complainant had gone to the house of accused no. 2. There was some dispute between them on that date. It is the contention of the complainant that accused nos. 2 to 6 never wanted that accused no. 1 should deliver of a child and therefore they insisted upon her to have an abortion. In fact, the complainant had received a letter from accused no. 1 on 19/11/2005 that she is keeping good health and would give a nice gift to him. By notice dated 1/7/2006, the complainant came to know that the accused no. 1 had aborted a foetus in connivance with other accused and at the advice of accused no. 4. The complainant, therefore, filed this complaint. The learned Magistrate issued process against accused persons and being aggrieved by that order, this application has been preferred.