AMIT KUMAR SONI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners to invoke the extra ordinary powers of this Court to quash the FIR in Crime No. 451/2010 registered by Police Station- Gadarwara, District- Narsinghpur for alleged offence under Section 498-A/34 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and also the subsequent proceedings.

(2.) IN brief, the prosecution case is that petitioner no.1 Amit Kumar Soni is the husband, Anand Kumar Soni petitioner no.2, is father-in-law and petitioner no.3 Smt. Sangeeta Soni is wife of elder brother of petitioner no.1 Amit Kumar Soni, Jethani of respondent no.2 Smt. Poonam Soni.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for petitioners submits that as per FIR, no case is made out so proceedings should be quashed. She submits that it is crystal clear that after filing the case for divorce, a false case has been registered to harass the petitioners and to take revenge from them. LEARNED counsel has placed reliance on a decision of Apex Court in Bhura Ram & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. AIR 2008 SC 2666 in which it has been held for the purpose of Ss.177 and 178 of Cr.P.C. that if all alleged acts as per complaint relating to offence under Section 498- A IPC took place in State of Punjab, complaint filed in Court in State of Rajasthan where complainant residing with her maternal relations, no cause of action arose in Rajasthan, then the Magistrate at that place had no jurisdiction to deal with the said matter. But, as per above discussion, as per statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of respondent Smt. Poonam, the demand and harassment also took place at Gadarwara when she was left by petitioners no.1 and 2 and was threatened that if demand of dowry of Rs. One Lac and motor cycle is not fulfilled, then she will not be taken back to Katni and they left her at Gadarwara, so above ruling has no application in the instant case.