RAKESH KUMAR SHARMA Vs. SUMAN SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, for quashing the complaint dated 5th May, 1992 and the summoning order dated 21st September, 1992 passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana, and all further proceedings arising out of it, being an abuse of the process of Court.

(2.) The complainant herein is Smt. Suman Sharma. She alleged that Rakesh Kumar Sharma was married to her on 28th November, 1983 at Ludhiana. After her marriage she was maltreated by Rakesh Kumar Sharma on the ground that she should bring a sum of Rs. 50,000/- from her parents. When she failed to do so, he had mercilessly beaten her and turned her out of the house. She filed a complaint under Sections 406 and 498-A Indian Penal Code.

(3.) As a counter-blast her husband Rakesh Kumar Sharma filed a petition for divorce in the Court of Shri V.B. Handa, Additional District Judge, Ludhiana. It is alleged that false, defamatory imputations concerning the complainant intending to harm her reputation were made; Besides alleging defamatory imputations he appeared in the Court and stated that the complainant had a love affair with some other boy and she never wanted to marry Rakesh Kumar Sharma petitioner. It was thereupon further alleged by the complainant that the above defamatory imputations are false and the same were also made by all the accused in their statements before the said Court and copies of their statements were circulated by them amongst the relatives, friends and members of PUNJAB Page 2 of 3 the biradri of the complainant and defamatory imputations thus were widely circulated by all the accused with an intention to defame the complainant. The said defamatory imputations have been held to be false, and disbelieved by the Civil Court. And it has been held: TIJ do not find any reason to disbelieve the r version as given by the respondent that it was the petitioner who was maltreating her. Petitioner has not come to the Court, with clean hands and is not giving a truthful version of his matrimonial relations with the respondents. He otherwise also cannot be believed because at one time he states in his petition that the respondent left him for good towards the end of February, 1986 and on the other hand, he states that the respondent misbehaved with him and his friends, when she refused to prepare tea and threw teapot containing tea prepared by her in February, 1988. I do not find any sufficient evidence on the record from which it could be inferred that it is the respondent who has treated the petitioner with cruelty. It was further held, So, net conclusion on the basis of the evidence is that it is the petitioner who, for the reasons best known to him could not leave the evil designs which even were objected to by his father and in order to get rid of the respondent, he has filed this petition by raising false allegations of cruelty and mis-behaviour on the part of the respondent.T