VIMLA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the petitioners Smt. Vimla Soni and Dinesh Soni seeking quashing of the FIR No.45/2019 registered at the Police Station Mahila Thana (West), Jodhpur for the offences under Sections 498-A, 406, 323 and 120-B IPC.

(2.) Brief facts relevant and essential for the disposal of the petition are noted hereinbelow.

(3.) As per the allegations set out in the FIR, the respondent No.2 Smt. Nitu complainant was married to the petitioner No.2 Dinesh Soni on 15.04.2016. It appears that soon after the marriage, minor squabbles started taking place between the complainant and her mother-in-law the petitioner Vimla Soni over day to day household chores. The husband Dinesh Soni also used to quarrel with the complainant allegedly on the instigation of his mother. The complainant conceived from the wedlock and she was admitted at the AIIMS Hospital by her in-laws. She gave birth to a daughter named Ruparna on 13.12.2017. She was dropped off at her father's house after being discharged from the hospital. The parties allegedly quarrelled with each other over this sequence of events. The complainant stayed at her father's house for about 6 to 7 months after the birth of her child, whereafter, her husband took a separate premises on rent at Chandna Bhakhar, Jodhpur and the spouses started living there with their child. There too, the disputes between the husband and the wife continued over trivial issues. On 29.09.2018, the husband and the wife quarreled with each other, on which, the complainant's brother and other relatives came down to the rented house and an altercation took place between the parties. Dinesh Soni immediately vacated the rented premises and went back to live with his mother. The complainant was taken back to her father's house, where she had been living for last 4 to 5 months. Counselling was undertaken between the spouses for resolution of the matrimonial discord, but could not succeed. The husband refused to live with his wife. Thereupon, the impugned FIR came to be lodged against the petitioners and the other matrimonial family members.