Kuldeepak @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan & Ors.

By way of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the accused petitioners have approached this Court seeking quashing of the proceedings of the

Criminal Original Case No.17/2015 arising from FIR No.458/2010 registered at the Police Station Sumerpur, District Pali pending against them in the

court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bali, District Pali for the offences under Sections 498A and 406 IPC.

Facts in brief are that the respondent No.2 complainant submitted a written report to the SHO, Sumerpur alleging inter alia that she was married to the

petitioner No.1 Kuldeepak on 19.02.2009 as per the Hindu rites and customs. It was further alleged that at the time of marriage, her father gave

wholesome dowry viz. cash, ornaments and other household articles to the complainant. The complainant went to live at her matrimonial home at

Falna. However, soon after the marriage, her husband and other matrimonial relatives started harassing the complainant on account of dowry and

demanded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- in cash and a motorcycle for the petitioner Kuldeepak. The complainant expressed that her father was not

financially sound enough to accede to these demands on which, just about 7-8 days of the marriage, Kuldeepak (husband) slapped the complainant

whilst her mother-in-law and her Jethani Meena Sharma, pulled her hair. The complainant somehow tolerated the cruel acts of the accused. About a

month of the marriage, she went to Ahore and rejoined her duty as a Nurse at the Bishnoi Nursing Home where, she was serving from before her

marriage. Her father-in-law, grand mother-in-law and brother-in-law threatened her that she must leave the service or else, she would be turned out

of the matrimonial home. On being so compelled, the complainant had no choice but to leave her job and started living at the matrimonial home.

However, her in-laws persisted with their cruel behaviour and continued to demand a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and a motorcycle and pressurised the

complainant to bring the same from her father. The husband Kuldeepak and Jethani Meena Sharma threatened that she would be killed by burning

after pouring kerosene upon her. When the cruelties crossed all limits and the complainant could not tolerate the torture any further, she called her

father who expressed his inability to meet the unjust demands of the accused on which, the complainant was expelled from the matrimonial home on

23.01.2010. Since then, she was residing at Sumerpur. The community members tried to intervene and talk sense into the accused persons but they did

not relent from the demands. On the basis of this report, the above mentioned FIR came to be registered and investigation was commenced. A

charge-sheet was filed in the court concerned only against the petitioner Kuldeepak for the offences under Sections 498A and 406 IPC. However, on

an application being moved by the respondent No.2 under Section 190 Cr.P.C., process was also issued against the petitioners No.2 and 3 being the

mother in law and sister in law of the complainant. The petitioners challenged the order taking cognizance through separate revisions filed before the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sumerpur on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. The revision petitions were allowed by a common order dated

10.07.2012 and the order taking cognizance was set aside. On an application moved by the petitioner No.1, the learned ACJM, Sumerpur directed

return of the charge-sheet to the Additional Public Prosecutor for the submission thereof in the competent court having jurisdiction. Thereafter, a fresh

charge-sheet was filed in the court of the ACJM, Bali against the petitioner No.1 only. However, the ACJM, Bali accepted the application filed by the

respondent No.2 under Section 190 Cr.P.C. and issued process against the petitioners No.2 and 3 vide order dated 07.01.2015. It may be noted

here that even before these proceedings were being contemplated by the respondent NO.2, the petitioner No.1 had filed an application for dissolution

of marriage under Section 13(1)(A) against her in the court of Additional District Judge, Bali on 03.11.2010. Notice of the said divorce petition was

served on the respondent whereafter, the FIR in question came to be lodged. The application for divorce submitted by the petitioner No.1 was

transferred from the court of the Additional District Judge, Bali to the Family Court, Pali on 25.09.2013. Initially, the divorce petition was dismissed for

non-prosecution but thereafter, the same was restored and finally, the parties moved an application under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act and

their marriage was dissolved vide judgment cum decree dated 20.06.2014.

In view of these significant developments, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings on the ground that

the allegations of cruelty owing to demand of dowry stand totally diluted and have been virtually nullified in view of the pleadings of the application

filed by the parties in the court of the Family Court, Pali under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act and so also, their evidence recorded during

these proceedings.

Shri Devesh Bohra, learned counsel representing the petitioners has presented on record, all these proceedings and drew the Court’s attention to

the affidavit and statement of Ms. Mamta recorded by the Family Court on 20.06.2014. Neither in the affidavit nor in the statement, did Ms. Mamta

level any allegation regarding she having been treated with cruelty in the matrimonial home on account of demand of dowry. She further admitted that

there was no possibility of the matrimonial relationship being restored or revived. She also admitted that she would not demand any maintenance from

the petitioner Kuldeep. Shri Bohra urged that as the matrimonial relationship between the petitioner Kuldeep and the respondent No.2 has been

terminated by mutual consent, no useful purpose would be served by keeping these virtually futile criminal proceedings pending.

Per contra, learned counsel Shri T.C. Sharma representing the complainant contended that complainant’s streedhan articles are still retained by

the accused and as such, this Court should not interfere in the criminal proceedings pending before the trial court and craved dismissal of the misc.

petition.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced at Bar and have gone through the material available on record.

Significantly enough, neither in the affidavit nor in her sworn statement recorded by the Family Court, did Ms. Mamta, the respondent complainant

herein, level any allegation of cruelty or demand of dowry against any of the petitioners. All that she stated in her sworn statement was that a

matrimonial dispute arose between her and Kuldeepak owing to conceptual differences. She did not level even a semblance of allegation that she had

ever been harassed or humiliated at her matrimonial home on account of demand of dowry. Furthermore, no allegation was made by her that any of

her streedhan articles were illegally retained by the accused. This statement was recorded much after lodging of the criminal case. Even in the

statement of Ms. Mamta recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. during investigation of the FIR referred to supra, she did not level any allegation

whatsoever that she asked the accused to return her streedhan articles and that the accused refused to do so.

In this background, manifestly ingredients of the offences alleged are not made out against the accused from the relevant record including the

proceedings of the Family Court which form an integral part of the proceedings required to be considered for the just decision of the instant case.Â

Hence, the criminal proceedings pending against the accused deserve to be quashed.

In this background, the instant misc. petition deserves to be and is hereby allowed. All further proceedings of the Criminal Original Case No.17/2015

pending against the petitioners in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bali, District Pali arising from FIR No.458/2010 registered at the

Police Station Sumerpur, District Pali are hereby quashed as amounting to a gross abuse of process of law.