UMESH YADAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 14.9.2012 passed by Sri A.K. Dubey, learned Judicial Magistrate, Giridih, whereby cognizance has been taken against the petitioner for the offence under Sections 498-A, 340-B, 304-B, 328/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 498-A, 340-B, 304-B, 328/34 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Dhanwar P.S. Case No. 35 of 2012. The petitioner is the husband of the deceased and there is allegation against the petitioner and other co-accused persons, to have subjected the deceased to cruelty and torture for demand of dowry and to have committed her dowry death by poisoning. The marriage had taken place about six years ago.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after investigation of the case, the police submitted charge-sheet only under Section 306 IPC, but on the basis of protest petition, the Court below has taken cognizance under Sections 498-A, 340-B, 304-B?, 328/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner. If is also pointed out that investigation against other co-accused persons was continued. Learned counsel has accordingly, submitted that since after investigation the police has submitted charge-sheet only under Section 306 IPC, the impugned order taking cognizance for other offences is absolutely illegal and the same cannot be sustained in the eye of law.