SUDESH RANI Vs. ANIL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the applicant and for the reasons stated in the application, which is supported by an affidavit, delay of 317 days in filing the application for grant of leave to appeal is condoned.

(2.) ACCORDINGLY , the application is allowed. Crl. Misc. No. A -976 -MA of 2013 ( O&M ) Sudesh Rani has filed this application under Section 378 (4) Cr.P.C for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 1.11.2012 passed by the court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sonepat, whereby the complaint filed by her under Sections 109 and 494 IPC against her husband and his other family members was dismissed and all the accused were acquitted of the charges framed against them.

(3.) THE marriage between the applicant and respondent No.1 Anil Kumar was solemnised on 8.2.1998 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. They lived together upto 1.1.1999. As per allegations of the applicant, her husband and parents -in -law (respondents No.1 to 3 herein) along with other family members started harassing her for not bringing sufficient dowry and she was compelled to leave her matrimonial home on 1.1.1999. In this regard, an FIR No. 355 dated 14.12.2000 under Sections 498 -A and 406 IPC was got registered against the respondents at Police Station Ganaur, wherein respondents No.1 to 3 were arrested and some dowry articles were recovered from their possession. It is further the case of the applicant that subsequently, in the year 2003, her husband (respondent No.1) performed the second marriage with Meena (respondent No.4). It has been further alleged by the applicant that from the second marriage, there are two issues. The learned trial court summoned accused No.2, 3, 9 and 10 for the commission of offence punishable under Section 109 IPC, whereas accused No.1 was summoned for the commission of offence punishable under Section 494 IPC. After conclusion of the pre -charge evidence, the above named accused were charge sheeted for the aforesaid offences.