BHARTI JHA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) It is submitted by counsel for applicant that she is the sister-in-law of respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 2 lodged an FIR on the allegations that she got married to Anil Jha on 15/11/2021. After her marriage, her husband and his family members started abusing and use to pass taunts and assault her on the ground of bringing less dowry. In order to save her marital life, she was tolerating the cruelty meted out to her by her husband with a hope and belief that on one day the behaviour of her husband would improve but it did not happen and the demand of dowry by her husband went on. In the meanwhile, she gave birth to a girl child on 8/9/2022. The applicant also used to extend a threat that she would kill respondent No. 2 and her daughter by burning and also used to claim that no one can cause any harm to her. In the month of 2023, her husband came to her parental home and also demanded dowry and on account of non fulfilment of demand of dowry, he started assaulting her and also dragged her on the road. On account of timely intervention by the by passers, she survived otherwise her husband would have killed her. Thereafter, her husband took her back to her matrimonial house. In the meanwhile, respondent No. 2 again got pregnant and in spite of resistance by respondent No. 2, he continued to have physical relationship with her. When she got herself medically examined, then it was found that she is carrying the pregnancy of one month. When her husband came to know about that, then he started claiming that he is not the father of the child and he would sell the child. He also started alleging that the biological father of the child is the younger brother of respondent No. 2. On 28/7/2023, her husband gave a kick in her stomach as a result she suffered abortion. It was further alleged that applicant No. 2 was also visiting her house frequently and was also assaulting her and used to allege that whenever respondent No. 2 goes to her parental home, then she comes back with pregnancy. She was also insisting that the child does not belong to her brother and was alleging that in fact the child belongs to younger brother of respondent No. 2. She was also insisting that respondent No. 2 should get the DNA test of the child. It was further alleged that applicant is residing nearer to her matrimonial house and always challenges that respondent No. 2 may lodge the report but nobody can cause any harm to her and she also threatened that she would kill respondent No. 2 and her daughter and accordingly the FIR was lodged.

(3.) Challenging the FIR lodged by respondent No. 2, it is submitted by counsel for applicant that in fact applicant is the resident of Sri Ganganagar (Rajasthan) which is evident from the Aadhar Card which has been filed as Annexure-P/4. It is further submitted that even otherwise for prosecuting the near and dear relatives of the husband of the complainant, the allegations must be clear and specific and the near and dear relative cannot be compelled to face the ordeal of trial on the basis of vague, omnibus and general allegations. The allegations which have been made against applicant are general in nature, therefore, the FIR is liable to be quashed. In support of his contention, counsel for applicant has also relied upon the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Kahkashan Kausar Alias Sonam and others Vs. State of Bihar and Others, decided on 8/2/2022 in Criminal Appeal No. 195/2022.