KAPILA SHRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND TWO OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against an order dated 4.11.2004 passed in Sessions Case No. 60/2003 by Shri K. R. Dhruv, learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh whereby the application under Section 319, Cr PC filed by the prosecution for taking cognizance of offence under Section 498-A, IPC against the non-applicant Nos. 2 and 3 was dismissed on the ground that non-applicant Nos. 2 and 3 who were accused in the Sessions Case No. 60/2003 were discharged vide order dated 22.9.2003 passed by the High Court in Criminal Revision No. 442/2003.

(2.) Brief facts are that the appli-cant herein is the daughter-in- law of Smt. Chandra Kanta Shrivastava. Tathagat Shrivastava is the husband and Mrs. C. B. Verma is the aunt-in-law of the applicant. On 3.1.2002 Smt. Kapila Shrivastava, the applicant herein returned from the school. At that time Smt. Chandra Kanta Shrivastava was alone in the house. It is alleged that Smt. Chandra Kanta Shrivastava poured kerosene on the body of the applicant and set her on fire, as a result of which, she received 60% burn injuries. During investi- gation, Smt. Kapila Shrivastava, the applicant herein, in her dying declaration recorded by the Naib Tahsildar Shri S. L. Sahu implicated only Smt. Chandra Kanta Shrivastava in the aforesaid act. Subsequently, even in her statement under Section 161, Cr PC she did not implicate the non- applicants No. 2 & 3 herein regarding any harassment or cruelty for not bringing sufficient dowry.

(3.) Prosecution under Sections 307 and 498-A of IPC against Smt Chandra Kanta Shrivastava, mother-in-law of the applicant herein and under Section 498-A of IPC against Tathagat Shrivastava and Mrs. C. B. Verma, non-applicant Nos. 2 and 3 herein was launched by the Police Station Kotwali, Raigarh in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raigarh who in turn committed the case to the Sessions Judge from where the learned Additional Sessions Judge received the case on transfer. After hearing the arguments on charge, the learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charge under Section 307, IPC against Smt. Chandra Kanta Shrivastava and under Section 498-A of IPC against Tathagat Shrivastava and Mrs. C. B. Verma, non-applicant Nos. 2 and 3 herein. In Criminal Revision No. 442/2003 preferred by Tathagat Shrivastava and Mrs. C. B. Verma, non-applicant Nos. 2 and 3 herein, the High Court of Chhattisgarh vide order dated 22nd September, 2003 quashed the order dated 16.8.2003 by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge had ordered framing of charge under Section 498-A of IPC against the non-applicant Nos. 2 and 3 herein.