DEEPAK Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Sec. 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for brevity, the 'CrPC') for seeking quashment of proceedings drawn against him in furtherance to FIR bearing Crime No.133/2017 for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 294, 498-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity, the 'IPC'), and Sec. 67 (D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 ( for brevity, the I.T. Act') registered at Police Station Manakchowk, District Ratlam.

(2.) The facts leading to filing of instant application are that the marriage was solemnized between the applicant and respondent No.2 on 26/2/2016 at Nagpur (Maharashtra) as per Hindu customs and rituals. According to the complaint made by the respondent No.2, at the time of marriage parents of the respondent No.2 as per their economical status gifted various household articles amounting to Rs.7.008 lacs to the applicant. Sometime of the marriage applicant and respondent No.2 residing peacefully but thereafter applicant forced to respondent No.2 to avail a sum of Rs.1.5 lack from her father. When she denied to the aforesaid demand then applicant used to abused and harassed her mentally, therefore, on 4/12/2016, respondent No.2 left the house of the applicant and came back to her parental house at Ratlam. Thereafter, the applicant in absence of the respondent No.2 torned her wedding dresses and created whatsapp group in the name of " Rishto Ki Paribhasha" and circulated pictures of said cloths. When the parents of the respondent No.2 consulted the applicant, he accepted his fault and promised not to harass the respondent No.2 again on which respondent No.2 returned back to her matrimonial house. They lived happily for sometime. Lateron applicant again started demanding dowry and harass the respondent No.2, as a result she returned back to the her parental house. After returned her back the applicant again created whatsapp group in the aforesaid name and circulated the message with intent to defame her. Then she lodged the report against the applicant and on the basis of which FIR bearing crime No. 133/2017 for the offence under Sec. 294, 498-A and 506 of I.P.C. and Sec. 67 (D) of I.T. Act was registered at Police Station Manakchowk, District Ratlam. After completion of the investigation, chargesheet was filed. The applicant is seeking quashment of those proceedings, have been initiated at the instance of the respondent No.2.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the facts of the present case are fit for invoking extraordinary power of this Court under Sec. 482 of CrPC for the reason that entire proceedings have been drawn with the intention of falsely implicating the present applicant and settle her personal vendetta. if entire prosecution story is treated to be gospel truth, no case is made out against the applicant. As per the prosecution case itself the alleged demand of dowry and cruelty attributed at Nagpur (Maharashtra) not at Ratlam, therefore, court of Ratlam is not having jurisdiction to try the case in the light of the provision of Sec. 177 of Cr.P.C. In support of his contention learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra Vs. State of U.P. (2012) 10 SCC 741.