REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

DALVEER SINGH Appellant

V/S

State Of Mp. And Anr. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

DHANALAKSHMI V. R . PRASANNA KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
JANATA DAL V. H.S. CHOWDHARY [REFERRED TO]
TILLY GIFFORD VS. MICHAEL FLOYD ESHWAR AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
R P KAPUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
NAGAWWA VS. VEERANNA SHIVALINGAPPA KONJALGI [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. L MUNISWAMY [REFERRED TO]
MADHAVRAO JIWAJIRAO SCINDIA VS. SAMBHAJIRAO CHANDROJTRAO ANGRE [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. BHAJAN LAL [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BIHAR VS. P P SHARMA IAS [REFERRED TO]
JANATA DAL VS. H.S.CHOWDHARY [REFERRED TO]
GANESH NARAYAN HEGDE VS. S BANGARAPPA [REFERRED TO]
RUPAN DEOL BAJAJ MRS B R BAJAJ VS. KANWAR PAL SINGH GILL:STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. O P SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
RASHMI KUMAR VS. MAHESH KUMAR BHADA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. O C KUTTAN :STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
SATVINDER KAUR VS. STATE GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI [REFERRED TO]
DINESH DUTT JOSHI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
B S JOSHI VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
ZANDU PHARMACEUTICAL WORKS LTD VS. SHARAFUL HAQUE [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. SAROJ KUMAR SAHOO [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION VS. NEPC INDIA LTD [REFERRED TO]
R KALYANI VS. JANAK C MEHTA [REFERRED TO]
MAHESH CHOUDHARY VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
SUSHIL SURI VS. CBI [REFERRED TO]
PADAL VENKATA RAMA REDDY ALIAS RAMU VS. KOVVURI SATYANARAYANA REDDY [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. UJJAL KUMAR BURDHAN [REFERRED TO]
KAVITA VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
RAJIV THAPAR VS. MADAN LAL KAPOOR [REFERRED TO]
LALITA KUMARI VS. GOVT. OF U.P. [REFERRED TO]
VINOD RAGHUVANSHI VS. AJAY ARORA [REFERRED TO]
MOSIRUDDIN MUNSHI VS. MD. SIRAJ [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on the question of admission.

(2.) This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the F.I.R. and investigation in crime no. 293/2017 registered at Police Station Bhind Dehat, Distt. Bhind, for offence under Sections 498-A , 323 , 34 of I.P.C.

(3.) The necessary facts for the disposal of the present application in short are that the complainant/respondent no.2 is the widow of Late Indrajeet Singh Jatav. Respondent no.2 lodged a report that she was married to late Indrajeet Singh Jatav on 1-6-2013, as per Hindu Rites and Rituals. Her husband expired in a Rail Accident on 30- 10-2016. Thereafter, the applicant and the parents-in-law of respondent no.2 started harassing her physically and mentally, and ultimately, She has been turned out of her matrimonial house along with her children on 29-5-2017 and prior to that she was beaten by the applicant and her parents-in-law. On this complaint, the police has registered the offence under Sections 498-A , 323 , 34 of I.P.C. Challenging the F.I.R., it is submitted by the Counsel for the applicant, that the applicant is not the real brother- in-law of respondent no.2, but he is the cousin brother-in- law of respondent no.2. The applicant is residing separately at a distance of 30 Kms from the matrimonial house of the respondent no.2. The applicant is not on visiting terms with the parents-in-law of respondent no.2. It is further submitted that since, the applicant is running M.P. Online Franchisee, and since, he is financially well, therefore, he has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that day by day, a tendency is increasing in the society to falsely implicate the near and dear relatives of the husband. Per contra, it is submitted by the Counsel for the State that there are specific allegations against the applicant, and when the F.I.R. discloses the commission of cognizable offence, then in the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. State of U.P. reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1, the police is under obligation to register the F.I.R. The investigation is still going on.

Click here to view full judgment.

DALVEER SINGH Vs. STATE OF MP. & ANR.

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address