RAMDEEN Vs. SUMAN TYAGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants have preferred this revision under Section 397 Cr. P. C. aggrieved by the order dated 22-7-2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Jaura in Criminal Revision No. 182/ 06 whereby allowed the revision petition preferred by respondent No. 1 /complainant against the order dated 2-9-2006 passed by JMFC, Jaura in unregistered private complainant Case No. 0/06 whereby the trial Magistrate has dismissed the complaint under Section 203 of Cr. P. C.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that respondent No. 1 Suman Tyagi claiming herself to be the legally wedded wife of the applicant No. 2 Gopal. The applicant No. 1 Ramdeen is the father-in-law, applicants Nos. 3 & 4 are the sisters-in-law and Nos. 5-6 and 7 are the aunts-in-law (chachiya saas) of the complainant. The complainant respondent No. 1 has filed a private complaint before the JMFC, Jaura on 9-1-2006 with the allegation that all the applicants-accused after her marriage started harassing her coupled with demand of dowry and on 30-11-2005 when the complainant went to her in-law's house, at that time, all the applicants-accused started abusing and again started demanding dowry and also caused injury to her by means of legs and fists. The complainant has also lodged an FIR at the police station, Jaura but the police had not taken any cognizance against the applicants-accused, therefore, she filed the aforesaid complaint before the JMFC. The learned JMFC recorded the statement of respondent No. 1/Complainant, Suman Tyagi and the witnesses Nanakram, Rakesh and Hakim Singh and thereafter hearing the complainant, by order dated 2-9-2006, dismissed the complaint and held that this complaint has been lodged only to harass the applicants-accused because of the fact that the complainant faced a trial under Section 302 IPC for the alleged murder of her mother-in-law Rampyari Bai on 9-10-2003 and because of the aforesaid prosecution the complainant with mala fide intention filed the aforesaid complaint under Sections 498-A, 323 and 506-B of IPC. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of dismissal, the respondent/complainant has filed Criminal Revision No. 182/2006 which has been decided by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jaura by the impugned order dated 22-7-2009, allowed the revision petition and set aside the order of dismissal of the complaint filed by the respondent/complainant and directed the trial Court to register the case under Sections 498-A, 323, 294 and 506-B of IPC and proceed with the trial in accordance with law. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the Revisional Court, the applicants came up before this Court by this revision petition.

(3.) Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.