AMIT PATHAK Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Regard being had to the similitude of the controversy as all cases originate from the same cause of action, all petitions were heard analogously and decided by this common order. For convenience's sake, facts as narrated in M.Cr.C.No.51674/2022 are taken into consideration.

(2.) Petitioner (of M.Cr.C.No.51674/2022) is husband of respondent No.2 who happens to be his wife and complainant of the case and has filed the FIR vide crime No.38/2021 at Police Station Mahila Thana Padav District Gwalior for the offence punishable under Ss. 498-A, 377, 354, 506, 34 of IPC and Sec. 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the DP Act"). Through this petition under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. petitioner sought following reliefs:

(3.) Complainant/respondent No.2 filed the complaint against the petitioner and other co-accused (who have challenged the proceedings by way of separate criminal revisions) that after marriage being solemnized with the present petitioner on 29-04- 2018 according to Hindu Rites and Rituals at Bhind, after some time, petitioner - Major Amit Pathak/husband and other family members viz. Sumit Pathak (brother-in-law), Sarvesh Chandra Pathak (father-in-law) and Smt. Kusumlata Pathak (mother-in-law) raised dowry demand for Fortuner Car and financial assistance for construction of house. She was subjected to harassment time and again and meanwhile when she conceived then she was forced to abort. Not only that, husband of complainant who is an Army Officer and posted as Major at Manipur, since inception/honeymoon, forced her for unnatural anal and oral sex.