ROMA DATT AND OTHERS Vs. RAJENDRA NATH DATT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. where the petitionerS pray for quashing of the complaint No.0/9/2006 dated 9.1.2006 under Sections 34,109,114,120-B,176,177,403,406 etc. of I.P.C. (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. Even though a prayer for quashing of the consequential proceedings has been made in the head-note of the petition, but a similar prayer is absent from the final prayer-clause.

(2.) In the backdrop of the allegations which have been stated in the complaint, is a deep-rooted marital dispute which has simmered between the parties for a long time leading to multiple litigation, complaints and other related issues pertaining to the maintenance etc.

(3.) The marriage between petitioner No.1 Roma Datt and the complainant/respondent was solemnized on 16.11.1986 at Karnal. Out of the wedlock, two children were born namely Ishita and Paras. The complainant alleged in his complaint that he initially lived in Delhi from 1984 to 2002 and then he shifted to Vadodra where he suffered health problems on account of the cruel attitude of his wife and in-laws. Legal notices were issued to the petitioners by the complainant, but the contents and the grievance as expressed in the legal notices have not been detailed in the complaint. Eventually, it has been alleged that petitioner No.1 abandoned the complainant in Vadodra on 21.3.2005 and when attempts were made to bring her back, she picked up a quarrel with him and his parents. A complaint was allegedly filed by the petitioners at Manimajra on 12.6.2005 on the basis of which F.I.R. No.188 of 2005 was registered against the complainant and his parents on 15.6.2005 under Sections 406,506 I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act leading to the arrest of his parents. The complainant sought quashing of the F.I.R. and this Court granted interim stay to him and on his return to Vadodra, he found that the locks of the house were changed, upon which he contacted the police and filed a comprehensive complaint before the Court on 18.11.2005 in which an enquiry was ordered under Section 202 Cr.P.C. The complainant thus alleged that he was dispossessed from his house and car and scooter. He then visited his Bank namely Central Bank of India, Subhanpura, Vadodra on 22.11.2005 to withdraw money for sustenance, but he was shocked to know that the balance in the Savings Bank Account No.13447 was reduced from Rs.15751 to Rs.551/- which also got adjusted on 12.12.2005 against the annual rent of a locker held jointly by petitioner No.1 and the complainant.