JUDGEMENT
RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA,J. -
(1.)Petitioners/accused have filed this miscellaneous crimi- nal case under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the F.I.R. and its entire criminal proceedings arising out of crime No. 45/2017 dated 11.10.2017, registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Sagar for the offence under Sections 498-A, 406 read with 34 of Indian Pe- nal Code and under Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act.
(2.)The prosecution story in brief is that the marriage of re- spondent No.2 was solemnized with petitioner No.1 Mohd. Sajid dated 18.6.2012 according to Muslim rites and customs. Petitioner/accused No.2 Munna Master is father-in-law, petitioner/ac- cused No.3 Smt. Jameela is mother-in-law, petitioner/accused No.4 Jahid is brother-in-law and petitioner/accused No.5 Smt. Mubina is sister-in-law of the respondent No.2. At the time of her marriage, pe- titioners/accused demanded dowry of Rs.5 Lacs. At the time of mar riage, the father of the respondent No.2 had given sufficient dowry to the petitioners/accused. From the wedlock of petitioner/accused No.1 and respondent No.2, they have been blessed with a male child. Peti- tioners/accused humiliated and tortured her. Petitioner/accused No.1 remared the respondent No.2 on his color and told her the he will marry with another girl who will give Rs.2 Lacs for open a Mechanic shop. Petitioners/accused humiliated and tortured her, they threw out from her matrimonial house dated 15.8.2014. Respondent No.2 was tortured by the petitioners/accused. Petitioner/accused No.5 Mubeena is sister-in-law who is residing with her husband and child in Sadar at Sagar. She used to come daily in the matrimonial house of respondent No.2. She also tortured and humiliated her due to non-ful- filment of said dowry and refused to keep her. So on 17.8.2017, re- spondent No.2 lodged a complaint at Police Station Mahila Thana, Sagar. Thereafter, during the investigation, statements of respondent No.2, Indrajeet Singh, Smt. Bhagwati Keer, Smt. Asha Raikwar and Gajraj Singh Raikwar have been recorded. Petitioners/accused were arrested and charge-sheet has also been filed.
(3.)Learned counsel for the petitioners/accused submits that immediately after the marriage, the behavior of respondent No.2 turned cruel towards the petitioners/accused and she does not want to live with the petitioner/accused No.1 as his wife. Respondent No.2 told to the petitioners/accused that she had some affair with another person at Jabalpur. So she was not mentally prepare to accept the pe- titioner/accused No.1 as her husband. After sometime, she went to her parents and did not return back to her matrimonial house. So pe- titioner/accused No.1 filed a petition before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sagar for Restitution of Conjugal Rights against the re- spondent No.2. Respondent No.2 was summoned and on 23.02.2015 learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sagar passed the judgment and decree in favour of petitioner/accused No.1. Respondent No.2 was directed to live with the petitioner/accused No.1 but respondent No.2 refused to obey the order of learned Family Court, Sagar.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.