ASHOK KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of two criminal petitions. S.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No. 545/2000 Ashok Kumar & Ors. v. State of Raj. & Anr. is a petition Under section 482 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 6.12.1999 by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar in FIR No. 532/98 the application of the petitioners was dismissed and the application of the complainant was allowed and the cognizance has been taken against the petitioners for offences Under sections 498-A & 406 IPC. They are husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law of deceased. S.B. Cr. Revision Petition No. 911/1999 has been preferred by Laxmi Narain against the same order by which he rejected the cognizance order against non-petitioner Nos. 2 to 8 taken by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Neem Ka Thana vide order dated 26.5.99 in relation to FIR No. 532/98. Since both the matters relate to the same FIR and the same order, I have heard these petitions together.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for all the parties in detail and have gone through the entire record of the trial court.

(3.) Briefly stated, on 23.12.98 Laxmi Narain lodged a report at Police Station Neem Ka Thana stating that his daughter Leelawati was married to Ashok Kumar on 5.6.98. He gave large dowry as per his status. Immediately before the marriage when ceremony of 'Lagun' was performed, a scooter was given but the father of the boy Dhumi Ram Yadav, brother Dr. Rameshwar Prasad, Narain Ram and the boy Ashok Kumar himself, boy's mother Sarbati, aunty Tarawati, sister Vimlesh, brother Surendra and the cousin brother Peeyush and the grand-mother Nanchi became angry and told that the father of the girl is bring a Mahendra jeep in the 'Lagun'. At that time 25-35 persons including Ramswaroop, Man Singh, Raghunath, Dr. Jagdish Prasad, Mussadilal were present who persuaded the boy as well as his relations to accept 'Lagun'. Then quite a good number of gold and silver ornaments and the cash Rs. 11,011/- was given. It is further alleged in the report that a doctor who is a relation of the boy also asked to deduct the price of the scooter and then give a jeep at the time of marriage. The first information report mentions a full paragraph of the articles given at the time of marriage and it is stated that a very huge amount was spent in the marriage. It is further alleged that on 3.6.98, the elder brother of Laxmi Narain died. However, the marriage was performed on 5.6.98 but Mahendra jeep could not be given at the time of marriage, therefore, the husband of the girl as well as all other relations became unhappy and it was said that the girl would not be taken but after due persuasion of relations the girl could go with them. The brother of the girl Daya Ram was also sent but as soon as the girl reached her in law's house, Dhumi Ram, Narain, Dr. Rameshwar Prasad, lady inmates of the house including Vimlesh all cried and said that jeep was not given at the time of marriage and that the boy was married in a family of beggars. Immediately after the marriage, Leelawati was pestered and it is alleged that Ashok Kumar and Vimlesh started beating her. A letter to that effect was written by Leelawati on 7.6.98. It is further stated in the first information report that Daya Ram unfolded the whole story on 8.6.98. Some relations of the girl including Mussadilal and Ramswaroop went to her in-law's of the girl. At that time, Leelawati was in her-in-laws house who was taken back by Laxmi Narain, the father of the girl. The husband of the girl as well as Dr. Rameshwar Prasad and Dhumi Ram came and took away Leelawati and told that in case the jeep is given then only Leelawati would be kept otherwise the girl would be sent back. Thereafter, Dhumi Ram, Ashok Kumar, Sarbati, Tarawati, Dr. Rameshwar Prasad, Narain, Vimlesh, Surendra, Peeyush and Nanchi all started giving beatings to Leelawati. On 11.6.98, Leelawati again wrote a letter to her parents. However, she stayed in her in-law's house for about 10 days during which she was pestered and given beatings and it is further alleged that some blank papers were got signed from her. After that the girl was given beatings and was shunted out. Ashok Kumar, husband of Leelawati left Leelawati near the house of her parents. She was not allowed to bring her 'stridhan' and was asked that as soon as the jeep was arranged, the husband and in- laws may be informed. It was further stated in the first information report that though the matter related to the month of June, 1998, yet the relations were trying to patch up the matter and hence the report was lodged with delay. After lodgement of the report, a case Under sections 498-A and 406 IPC was registered, investigated and police submitted challan against Ashok Kumar, Dhumi Ram. Dr. Rameshwar Prasad, Sarbati, Tarawati and Vimlesh for offences Under sections 498-A and 406 IPC. The learned Magistrate took cognizance against them. It were Ashok Kumar, Dhumi Ram and Sarbati who challenge the order of cognizance before the learned Additional Sessions Judge. On the other hand, complainant filed an application before the trial court on 20.3.99 with a prayer that Narain Ram, Surendra, Peeyush and Nanchi were also involved and there was ample evidence against these four persons and that it was with the connivance of the police that challan was not submitted against these four persons. Hence cognizance should be taken. Rameshwar Prasad also filed an application on 17.5.99 in which it was stated that he was Medical Officer in hospital and his wife Tarawati and both of them have been falsely implicated while Dhumi Ram was a teacher and his wife Sarbati is an old woman and no case was made out against them. The learned Magistrate by his order dated 26.5.99 took cognizance against Narain, Surendra, Peeyush and Nanchi and summoned them by a bailable warrant. Aggrieved with that order an application was filed before the High Court which was later on converted in S.B. Cr. Revision Petition No. 426/98 and was sent for the decision to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Neem Ka Thana maintaining that the same was not maintainable before the High Court, The complainant has challenged the order in S.B. Cr. Revision Petition No. 911/1999 by which Rameshwar Prasad, Tarawati, Vimlesh, Narain Ram, Surendra, Peeyush and Nanchi have been exonerated.