SONU DINESH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR, charge sheet and the proceedings pending before the JMFC, Gwalior in Case No. 4603/2011.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this petition are that marriage of the petitioner No. 1 was solemnized with respondent No. 2 on 17/4/2009 as per Hindu Rituals. After marriage respondent No. 2 lived with petitioner No. 1 for few days and was not interested to live in joint family and left house of petitioners in May, 2009 and then living separately. Thereafter, respondent No. 2 made a complaint on 26/9/2009 at Mahila Police Station, Gwalior against the petitioners alleging that petitioners are harassing her on account of demand of dowry. On the basis of the complaint conciliation proceedings were started at Mahila Police Station, where parties were called on 1/10/2009 Petitioner No. 1 expressed his desire to live with respondent No. 2, and if respondent No. 2 is not interested to live with him and wants divorce he is willing to return all her Stridhan. It is further stated that on 10/10/2009 all articles given by father of respondent No. 2 was deposited with Mahila Thana and also agreed to return motor cycle and cash of Rs.10,000.00. Thereafter, petitioner No. 1 has filed a petition under Sec. 9 of Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court, Gwalior, which was registered as Case No. 560-A/2009 HMA. Thereafter, respondent No. 2 filed a complaint with SP, Gwalior against the petitioners alleging commission of cruelty in connection with demand of dowry. However, after inquiry it was found that petitioners No. 4 to 11 are residing separately. Petitioner No. 10 Ballo is ill and his treatment is going on. It was also stated that complainant alongwith her father has compromised the dispute by filing an affidavit that they do not want take further action and the motor cycle and other articles have also been received by the complainant Poonam.

(3.) It is submitted that the allegations regarding demand of dowry and commission of cruelty is false. The conciliation proceedings which took place in the Paramarsh kendra it is evident that matter has already resolved in 2009, therefore, lodging of the report on 1/4/2010 is unwarranted. It is further submitted that even after lodging of FIR respondent No. 2 entered into an agreement on 8/6/2010 and admitted to have received all her Stridhan and agreed to withdraw all cases and complaints. It is further submitted that report itself reveals that no offence has been committed by the petitioners, therefore, FIR No. 40/2010 as well as the charge sheet and proceedings pending before JMFC, Gwalior be quashed.