RAM GOPAL SAH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the part of the order dated 7th January, 2005 passed in G.A. No. 75 of 2000 by the Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa, whereby he has rejected the petitioner's prayer to make Hiralal Dodrajka as an accused for giving dowry under Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act').

(2.) IT has been stated that the said case was initiated at the instance of the daughter of Hiralal Dodrajka, wherein she has alleged demand. of dowry by the petitioner, who happened to be the father -in -law. According to the complainant, her father had given several articles and cash at the time of marriage and he IS also liable for prosecution under Section 3 of the Act.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the dowry was given by the complainant's father. Under Section 3 of the Act, giving or taking dowry is an offence. The complainant's father is, thus, also equally liable for prosecution for contravening law, as prescribed by Section 3 of the Act. Learned court below without appreciating that giving and taking dowry are both punishable under Section 3 of the Act has erroneously refused to summon the father of the .opposite party no. 2. The impugned order is, thus, erroneous and liable to be set aside.