MADHU SHARMA Vs. M.L. SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MADHU Sharma and Meena Sharma, petitioners, mother-in-law and sister-in-law, respectively, of Smt. Savita Sharma have, invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under the provisions of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for quashing first information report dated 19-1-1989 (Annexure P. 5) lodged against them by Dr. Murari Lal, father of the complainant at Police Station, City Panipat for offences under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, inter alia, on the ground, of vagueness of the allegations and on the point of jurisdiction.

(2.) THE allegations in the first information report Annexure P. 5 are as under :-

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties besides perusing the record. The respondents in the return filed by them had admitted the authenticity of letters Annexures P. 3 and P. 4 written by Smt. Savita Sharma to her mother-in-law and husband, respectively. The explanation tendered by the respondents in paragraph 4 of the return for writing these letters is that Smt. Savita held the family of her in-laws in great esteem but it was the ultimate greed of the accused which led to this unfortunate situation. To understand the import of these letters, it would be worthwhile to reproduce their diction in verbatim. These letters are Annexures P. 3 and P. 4 which, read as under :-