SURENDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPLICANT , by way of instant application under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short), seeks leave to appeal against impugned judgment of acquittal dated 02.07.2014, passed by the learned trial Court, whereby complaint of the applicant under Section 494, 420, 506 and 120 -B of Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short) was dismissed.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case, as noticed by learned trial Court in Paras 2 and 3 of the impugned judgment, are that marriage of complainant was solemnized with accused No. 1 Reena on 19.03.2006, as per Hindu Rites and ceremony. After marriage, both complainant and accused No. 1 started living together and one daughter namely Sania was born out of this wedlock. On 2nd March, 2010, accused No. 2 to 4 came to the house of complainant and requested to take accused No. 1 to her parental home for some time. Accused No. 1 went to her parental home and took away all ornaments and valuable clothes with her. On 15.03.2010 complainant went to parental home of accused No. 1 and requested to send back accused No. 1 to her matrimonial home. But accused No. 2 to 4 requested to let the accused No. 1 stay for 15 days. After waiting for sufficient time, when the accused No. 1 did not come to her matrimonial home, complainant again visited the parental home of accused No. 1 on 01.04.2010 but accused No. 1 again did not return with him, on the ground of not feeling well. On 26.07.2010, complainant again went to his in -laws to bring back his wife. But accused No. 2 to 4 had beaten complainant and did not allow him to meet his wife and also threatened to kill him. Complainant came to know that accused No. 1 had been detained in illegal custody by the accused No. 5 & 6. On this, he moved an application under Section 97 of Cr.P.C. for issuance of search warrants before the Court of learned SDM, Kaithal, upon which accused No. 1 appeared before Court of learned SDM, Kaithal, along with other accused and gave her statement that she has solemnized marriage with accused No. 7 and was residing with him as his wife. Statement of accused No. 4, 6 & 7 had also been recorded, regarding solemnization of marriage of accused No. 1 in Court of learned SDM, Kaithal. Upon these statements, learned Court of SDM, Kaithal sent back the accused persons.

(3.) COMPLAINANT -applicant led his preliminary evidence. Learned trial Court sought the report under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and thereafter accused were summoned to face the criminal trial. In compliance of the summoning order, accused appeared before the Court. In his pre -charge evidence, complainant got examined Krishan Lal, Reader to SDM, Kaithal as CW1, Sushil Kumar Shastri as CW2, Chattar Singh as CW3, Hari Singh S.I. as CW5 and Sunita Devi as CW6. Complainant himself appeared as CW4 in the witness box.