ANU RAG AHUJA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BINDHU alias Doli was married to Atul Kumar at Ambala Cantt. on 4.2.1990. A son was born out of their wedlock on 21.2.1991. Petitioners Anurag Ahuja and Smt. Vibha Ahuja are son -in -law and daughter of Amar Nath Kumra and Smt. Savira Kumra alias Savita Kumra. Bindu alias Doli and Atul Kumar Kumra fell out. A litigation ensued between them. Bindu alias Doli filed a complaint under Sections 406/498 -A/120 -B of the Indian Penal Code in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ambala Cantt against her husband Atul Kumar Kumra, her father -in -law Shri Amar Nath Kumra, her mother -in -law Smt. Savira Kumra and sister -in -law Smt. Vibha and husband of her sister -in -law, Anurag Ahuja, learned trial Court after summoning the five accused, charged them under Sections 406/498 -A/120 -B of the Indian Penal Code, vide his order of February 22, 1992.

(2.) THROUGH this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Smt. Vibha Ahuja and Anurag Ahuja accused Nos. 4 and 5 respectively (in the complaint) have sought the quashing of order dated 22.2.1992 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ambala Cantt, as well as the proceedings in case First Information Report No. 289 dated 29.7.1991. The petition has been contested on behalf of the respondent. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) MR . Gill, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that Atul Kumar Kumra had filed a complaint under Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the complainant Bindu alias Doli for restitution of conjugal rites on 17.5.1991 in the Court of District Judge, &&& Ambala. There present complaint filed on 16.7.1991 was nothing but a counter -blast to the above said petition under Section 9 of the Act. In para No. 10 of the complaint it is mentioned that the learned Judicial Magistrate vide his order dated 18.7.1991 had sent the complaint to Station House Officer, Police Station, Ambala Cantt. for the registration of the case under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and in compliance thereof FIR No. 281 dated 29.7.1991 under Sections 498 -A/406/120 -B of the Indian Penal Code was recorded in Police Station, Ambala Cantt. A perusal of complaint Annexure P -1 shows that it was instituted on 16.7.1991. There is nothing on the record to show that the husband Atul Kumar Kumra had initiated proceedings under Section 9 of the Act and got issued summons against BIndu alias Doli prior to the filing of the complaint or registration of Suit case. Therefore, it cannot be said that the wife Bindu alias Doli had filed the complaint to wreak vengeance on the husband and his close relatives in retaliation for his having brought a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act against her. It can also not be held that the complaint was filed with the alleged motive and the First Information Report which was registered on the basis of the said complaint was an abuse of the process of the Court. First argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, falls to the ground.