Kaustubh Choubey & others vs State of M.P & another

This petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C has been filed for quashment of the proceeding of Regular Criminal Trial No.1961/2017 pending

before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sagar under sections 498A, 406, 294, 506, 354(C), 34 of IPC and sections 3 & 4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act, on the basis of FIR lodged by the respondent no.2.

The brief facts giving rise to this petition are that the applicant no.1/Kaustubh Choubey marriage was solemnized with the respondent no.2/Jyoti

Choubey on 29/01/2016 at Bhopal. The applicant no.2 and 3 are father-in-law and maternal aunt of the applicant no.1 respectively. Against the

applicants on 19/04/2017, the respondent no.2 made a complaint to Police Pariwar Paramarsh Kendra, Sagar that the applicants in connection

with the demand of Rs.30 lacs in dowry are torturing and harassing her and also took her stridhan and thrown her out of the house and presently

she is living in her parental house. The efforts of Police Pariwar Paramarsh Kendra, Sagar remained unsuccessful and the respondent no.2

emphasize to take criminal action against the applicants, then Police Station Mahila Thana, District Sagar registered Crime No. 24/2017 under

aforesaid sections against the applicants and after completion of the investigation filed charge sheet against the applicants and learned trial court

took the cognizance and the proceeding is pending in the concerned trial court, which is under challenge in this petition.

The applicants have challenged the proceedings on the ground that all the allegations made in the complaint against the applicants are false. The

respondent no.2 is suffering from ""epilepsy""? since childhood and without disclosing this fact her marriage with the applicant no.1 was solemnized

by her parents. When after her marriage she remained idle, lazy and prevented applicant with cohabitation and abnormal behaviour, it was

disclosed that she is suffering some serious aliment. On medical examination, it was revealed that she was suffering from ""epilepsy""? and since

2002 she is getting regular treatment and on revealing of this fact, the respondent no.2 leave the house of the applicant no.1 and residing with her

parents. On getting notice from the Police Pariwar Paramarsh Kendra, Sagar, the applicant expressed his willingness to take the respondent no.2

with him on the condition that she will admit in writing that she was suffering from ""epilepsy""? disease and made allegation falsely against the

applicants with regard to demand of dowry and harassment but such admission was not made in writing. Therefore applicant did not take her with

him and on behalf of the applicant no.1 on account of non-disclosure of the disease and cruel behaviour of the respondent no.2, the application

under section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed before the Family Court Bhopal on 03/11/2016, which was withdrawn with the liberty to file

petition for divorce on 29/04/2017 and thereafter petition under section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed on 05/05/2017 against the

respondent no.2. Thereafter as a counter blast false allegations have been made. It is also submitted that the applicant no.3 is maternal aunt of the

applicant no.1, she is married and resides at Karnataka and just to create pressure on the applicant no.1 she has been falsely implicated in the

case, which expose ill intention of the respondent no.2. Apparently the allegation has been made against the applicant with a view to wreck

vengeance or counter blast stating vague and general allegation hiding the real fact of the dispute. In this case learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners has place reliance on a judgment delivered by the Gwalior Bench of this Court in Misc. Criminal Case No.3658 of 2016 on 9.3.2017

(Parties being Sandeep Singh Bais @ Anshu and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and anr.), in which, the proceedings against relatives of the husband were

have been quashed on the ground that allegations against them are vague and omnibus and they resided at different places. Hence the proceeding

of the criminal case be quashed. If the proceeding is continued, it would amount to misuse of the process of the law and cause grave injustice to the

applicants.

The learned Government Advocate and counsel for the respondent no.2 have opposed the aforesaid contentions and prayed for dismissal of this

petition.

Having considered the contentions of learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the record, it reveals that the marriage of respondent no.2

was solemnized on 29/01/2016 and complaint to Police Pariwar Paramarsh Kendra, Sagar has been lodged on 19/04/2017. Between this period,

on medical examination it was found that the respondent no.2 was suffering from chronic disease of ""epilepsy""? and on behalf of the applicant no.1

on 03/11/2016 petition under section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed before the Family Court, Bhopal alleging laziness and abnormal

behaviour and suffering from ""epilepsy""? and non-disclosure of aforesaid facts at the time of marriage and having no interest in cohabitation with the

applicant no.1 and giving threatening of implication in false criminal case and the proceeding of the Court shows that the notice was served to the

respondent no.2 in the month of December, 2016. The proceeding of Police Pariwar Paramarsh Kendra, Sagar (Annexure A/7) also reveals the

fact that the respondent no.2 admitted her fault about her misbehaviour with the applicant no.1 and in-laws and admitted her disease and ready to

go with the applicant no.1 and there was no dispute with regard to demand of dowry and any harassment or torture given by the applicants and

thereafter the applicant no.1 has filed petition for divorce on 05/05/2017. It is also apparent from the record that the applicant no.3 is a married

lady residing with her husband at District Bellary in Karnataka. Therefore, the applicant no.3 has no occasion to harass and torture the respondent

no.2 in connection with demand of dowry and apparently she has been falsely implicated to take revenge with the applicant no.1.

In view of this Court in the light of aforesaid facts and circumstances, the contention of the applicants have a substance and there is no material

on record to suggest or to indicate the fact that the applicants harassed and tortured the respondent no.2.

Undoubtedly at this stage it is not required to be seen that whether the allegations are true or otherwise but when the allegations are so abjured,

ambiguous or doubtful that no reasonable man would accept the same, the High court could not have thrown its arms in the air and expressed its

inability to do anything in the matter. Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is a guarantee against injustice. Hon''ble the Apex court in the recent judgment,

Rajesh Sharma and ors. vs. State of U.P. And anr., passed in criminal appeal no. 1265/2017 dated 27.7.2017 as observed in para 14, as under :-

''Section 498-A was inserted in the statute with the laudable object of punishing cruelty at the hands of husband or his relatives against a wife

particularly when such cruelty had potential to result in suicide or murder of a woman as of mentioned in the statement of Objects and Reasons of

the Act 46 of 1983. The expression ''cruelty'' ?in Section 498A covers conduct which may drive the women to commit suicide or cause rt grave

injury (mental or physical) or danger to life or harassment with a view to coerce her to meet unlawful demand. It is a matter of serious concern ou

that large number of cases continue to be filed under already referred to some of the statistics from the Crime Records Bureau. This Court had

earlier noticed the fact that most of such complaints are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues.

In view of the aforesaid law laid down by the Apex Court and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, prima facie it appears that

there is no dispute with regard to demand of dowry and torture and harassment by the applicants. Real cause of the dispute is nondisclosure of

chronic disease of ""epilepsy""? before the marriage of the respondent no.2 and lazy and unsupporting behaviour of the respondent no.2 that is why

the applicant no.1 filed petition earlier for declaration of nullity of marriage and later on for divorce with the respondent no.2, which is pending. In

this background, the respondent no.2 has made false allegation with malice intention. Prima facie it is misuse of the process of court. Hence the

petition is allowed and proceeding of Regular Criminal Trial No.1961/2017 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sagar against the

applicants are quashed. A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial court concerned for information.