ASHOK LODHI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners/accused have filed this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the FIR bearing Crime No. 408/2016 registered at Police Station Begumganj, District Raisen for the offence punishable under Section 307, 324 and 34 of IPC.

(2.) Prosecution case in brief is that complainant/ respondent no. 2 is the wife of Dharmendra Soni. She is resideing in the house of Dharmendra Soni, at Shyamnagar, Begumganj District Raisen. On the date of incident i.e. on 12/09/2016 she has gone to see her husband at Tikamgarh when she returned back to her house in Shyamnagar at about 10.30 pm she saw that her house was locked and petitioners/accused were inside the house. When the complainant/respondent no. 2 asked them to open the lock. Petitioners-accused thrown kerosene oil on her, then she ran away from the place of incident. She was admitted in the hospital. She lodged report at the police station on which offence punishable under Section 307, 324 and 34 of IPC was registered, thereafter investigation is going on.

(3.) It is submitted by the petitioners-accused that house in question was allotted to one Keshav Prasad Soni and Laxmi Soni under the Rajiv Gandhi Ashraya Yojana, 2003. Keshav Prasad Soni and Laxmi Soni kept the house as mortgage with the consent of their son Dharmendra Soni and gave the same to Sanjeev Jain and Akshay Kumar Jain. Possession of the said house was handed over to Sanjeev Jain and Akshay Jain till then Sanjeev Jain and Akshay Jain were in possession of the property. The complainant/respondent no. 2 who claims to be wife of Dharmendra Soni is illegally trying to take possession of the house in question and has made repeated complaint to the Police Authorities. Laxmi Soni is the wife of original owner Keshav Prasad Soni. Legally wedded wife of Dharmendra Soni is Sonu Soni who has filed complaint against the complainant/ respondent no. 2. So in these circumstances, even if entire prosecution story is treated to be gospel truth, no case is made out against the petitioners/accused. No injuries has been caused to the complainant/ respondent no. 2. Complainant/ respondent no. 2 had no locus to claim any right over the property in question. Complainant/respondent no. 2 is not even legally wedded wife of Dharmendra Soni and in fact the mother and legally wedded wife of Dharmendra Soni have also lodged complaint against the complainant/ respondent no. 2 regarding her false claim and her illegal attempts to grab the house in question. Complainant/ respondent no. 2 has filed FIR purely for financial gains by exerting under pressure on the petitioners. In the absence of any injury being caused to the complainant and the absence of any credible evidence available on record to carry forward the concocted version stated by the complainant/ respondent no. 2. So FIR lodged by her deserves to be quashed.