NIDHI LOHIYA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD .

(2.) IT is submitted that respondent No. 2 has filed an application, which was registered as M.Cr.C. No. 6063/2013 and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties the respondent No. 2 has been granted anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that during course of the arguments counsel for the respondent No. 2 accused had mis -lead the Court on the point that the husband has filed an application under Section 13(1) of Hindu Marriage Act and thereafter, the complainant has lodged the report.. The complainant has lodged the report in the year 2008 before filing the petition under Section 13(1) of Hindu Marriage Act. It is further submitted that the delay in filing complaint is not a factor because the offence under Section 498(A) of IPC is a continuing offence. The respondent No. 2 accused is neither cooperating in the investigation nor complying with the conditions imposed by this Court because respondent No. 2 accused is threatening the complainant to give false evidence otherwise he would kill her. Hence the bail granted to respondent No. 2 be cancelled.

(3.) I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The petitioner has filed a copy of the complaint dated 5.11.2008 addressed to SHO, P.S., Lahar. From perusal of the copy it appears that it does not bear the seal of the concerning Police Station. Copy of the another complaint dated 17.12.2003 addressed to SHO, Mahila Thana, Padav has been filed, but it does not bear any receipt. The petitioner has also filed a copy of the application addressed to Supdt. Of Police, Gwalior regarding non -registration of FIR on complaint dated 17.12.2008. This application has been filed on 12.4.2013 i.e. the date on which the report of Crime No. 110/2013 was lodged. If the FIR was not recorded why the petitioner has not moved the Superior Officers or approached the Court, Petitioner has not explained why she has not taken the aforesaid action.