SANJAY SHARMA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant petition filed under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioners for quashing of FIR No.241/2016, dtd. 24/9/2016, registered at Police Station Hamirpur, H.P. under Ss. 498-A, 504 and 506 of IPC as well as consequent proceedings, if any, pending in the competent court of law.

(2.) Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that marriage inter se respondent No.2, Ms. Rama Sharma and petitioner No.1, Sanjay Sharma, was solemnized on 7/7/2004, as per Hindu Rites and Customs and out of their wedlock, one son Tushar, was born in the year 2006. Since, respondent No.2, was allegedly maltreated and given beatings by the petitioners, she started living separately at her parental house w.e.f. February, 2009. Allegedly, even after February, 2009, petitioners herein, started maltreating and harassing respondent No.2 by hurling abuses and using obscene words over telephone. Respondent No.2, initiated proceedings against her husband, petitioner No.1 under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 as well as under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C seeking therein maintenance, which are still pending adjudication. After 7 years of her departure from her matrimonial house, respondent No.2, instituted FIR, sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings against the petitioners (Annexure P-2), alleging therein that after two days of her marriage, petitioners started torturing her. She alleged that repeatedly, she was given beatings by the petitioners and was also extended threats to do away with her life. She alleged that on account of cruelty meted to her everyday, she was unable to reside alongwith the petitioners and in February, 2009, was forcibly ousted from her matrimonial house by the petitioners and since then, she along with her son is living with her parents. She also alleged that till date, she has not been returned her istridhan including gold/silver ornaments. After completion of investigation, police presented challan in the competent court of law, which is still pending adjudication. Petitioners herein have approached this Court in the instant proceedings for quashing of FIR on the ground that FIR sought to be quashed doesn't disclose offences, if any, punishable under Ss. 498-A, 504, 506 and 34 of IPC. It has been further claimed on behalf of the petitioners that there is an inordinate delay of 7 years in lodging of FIR, which itself suggests that FIR sought to be quashed, has been lodged with a view to harass the petitioners with whom, respondent No.2 has estranged relations. It has been further claimed that since petitioner No.1, filed complaint under Ss. 494 and 497 IPC read with Sec. 34 of IPC against respondent No.1, Rama Sharma and one person namely Sh. Onkar Singh, she in retaliation made serious allegations in the FIR, sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings.

(3.) Prayer made in the instant proceedings on behalf of the petitioners has been seriously opposed by the respondents on the ground that there is overwhelming evidence adduced on record by the prosecution, suggestive of the fact that the petitioners had been harassing respondent No.2, on account of bringing less dowry and, repeatedly she was given beatings by them. Mr. Narinder Guleria, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. I.S. Chandel, learned counsel, while making this Court peruse the FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceeding, vehemently argued that the same clearly discloses offences punishable under Ss. 498-A, 504, 506 and 34 IPC and as such, prayer made on behalf of the petitioners for quashing of FIR, deserves outright rejection. Above-named counsel further argued that the FIR clearly reveals that even in the year 2016, petitioner hurled abuses and indulged in character assassination of respondent No.2 and as such, there is no delay in lodging the FIR.