Saidan Begam and Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Prasad, J.—Smt. Rehana Begum wife of Sri Shafiq Ansari (applicant No. 6), lodged a F.I.R. of Crime No. 974 of 2004, under Sections 498A, 323 and 506, I.P.C. and , at Police Station Sipri Bazar, district Jhansi against her husband, Shafiq Ansari (applicant No. 6), mother-in-law, Smt. Saidan Begum (applicant No. 1), Jeth Rais Ansari (applicant No. 2), Jethanis Smt. Shahnaj (applicant No. 3), Smt. Shamsad (applicant No. 4) and son of Jeth Sharif Ansari (applicant No. 6).

The factual matrix of the F.I.R., allegations were that informant was married with Shafiq Ansari, on 11.3.1996, in which marriage Rs. One lac, ornaments, cloths and other articles were given in dowry. After the marriage, wife informant was tortured because of demand of dowry, which demand was regarding Rs. One lac for the purposes of getting a truck financed.

From the aforesaid wedlock, the couple were also blessed with two children. For the purpose of giving mental torture, it is alleged, in the F.I.R. that the husband used to sleep with her Jethani and had illicit relations with her because of which wife was also assaulted. Brother of the informant tried to pacify the husband and his relatives and even paid them Rs. 20,000 but all that did not yield any fruitful result. On 21.8.2004, the brother namely Abdul Kaleem Ansari came to in-laws house and took away informant with him. On 3.9.2004 at about 9 a.m., husband, mother-in-law and Jethanis are alleged to have reached Sipri Bazar, on a Marshal Jeep the parental house of the informant, and informed her that they have entered into an agreement for purchase of a truck for which they require Rs. 1 lacs which money they demanded from the brother of the informant. They were however informed that the brother is not at home and he even does not have that much of money. It is, further, alleged that accused assaulted informant and left the parental house in the same Marshal Jeep. This incident was witnessed by Lalloo and others. Abdul Kalam Ansari, brother of the wife informant, when returned back to his house, got the informant medically examined. It is further averred that informant''s in-laws refused to induct her in the family and had thereby destroyed her and her children''s lives. On such allegations informant lodged the F.I.R. against accused. Copy of F.I.R. is appended as Annexure-1 and Annexure-2 is the medical examination of informant in which five contusions have been shown, which medical examination was conducted on 4.9.2004.

Further perusal of this Criminal Misc. Application indicates, that registered crime resulted in filing of a charge-sheet against accused persons vide Annexure-3, dated 26.7.2005.

Accused persons prays for discharge before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 6, Jhansi in the relevant Case No. 3645 of 2004, State v. Shafiq and others which prayer for discharge was considered and rejected by the learned Magistrate finding prima facie case against accused-applicants vide his order dated 26.7.2006, copy of which is appended as Annexure-4 to this Criminal Misc. Application.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of dismissal of discharge, the accused persons preferred Criminal Revision No. 151 of 2005, before learned Sessions Judge, Jhansi. Memo of Revision has been appended as Annexure-5 to this Criminal Misc. Application. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Jhansi considered the said revision on merits and, finding it meritless, rejected the same vide his order dated 5.6.2008, which has been appended here as Annexure-6.

Half a dozen of accused-Appellants have therefore filed this criminal misc. application with the prayer that the aforesaid trial proceedings pending against them before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 6, district Jhansi be quashed.

I have heard Sri Dinesh Kumar Gupta, learned Counsel for the applicants in support of this application, Sri M. F. Ansari, learned Counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and learned A.G.A.

Counsel for the applicants contended that looking to the allegations levelled in the F.I.R., what can be said is that the wife was tortured by her husband and mother-in-law for the demand made by them for getting the truck financed. However, such a demand is not covered under the definition of dowry. Learned Counsel for the applicants further contended that against applicants Rais Ansari, his wife Smt. Shahnaz, his son Sharif, and Smt. Shamshad wife of Anis Ansari, there are no specific allegations. He further pointed out that the assault had been made for demand of dowry which could not be made by the aforesaid persons and therefore, prosecution of Smt. Shahnaz, Smt. Shamshad, Sharif and Rais Ansari is with a mala fide intention full of vindictiveness for the purposes of harassment and there are very remote chances of conviction of these applicants-accused and there-fore, their prosecution be quashed.

Learned Counsel for the opposite party No. 2 as well learned A.G.A. on the contrary refuted the contention raised by learned Counsel for the applicants and submitted that the prosecution could not be nipped into bud at its very inception as the offences are disclosed and therefore, this application be dismissed.

I have considered the contentions raised by both side.

Perusal of the record and facts mentioned above, indicates that the dispute between rival sides is in the nature of a family fued. The nature of allegations made in the F.I.R. indicates the demand of Rs. 1 lacs for the purposes of getting a truck financed. There is no other allegation so far as Rais Ansari (applicant No. 2). Smt. Shahnaj (applicant No. 3), Smt. Shamshad (applicant No. 4) and Sharif (applicant No. 5) are concerned. Perusal of record further indicates that names of these applicants have been falsely incorporated and no specific role has been assigned to them. Further, it is difficult to believe that these applicants will come in a Marshall Jeep and assault for demand of Rs. 1 lacs as finance money. This allegation is very dicey and it is difficult to accept the genuineness of the same at its face value.

So far as mother-in-law Smt. Saidan Begum, and husband Shafiq Ansari are concerned, perusal of records further indicates that they have demanded money which was paid by the brother to a tune of Rs. 20,000 and they must have assaulted the victim as she had sustained injuries as well and so offences are disclosed against these two accused persons husband and mother-in-law. Medical Report further prima facie establish torture meted out to the wife by these two applicants.

In view of the aforesaid facts, I allow this application, in part, in respect of Rais Ansari (applicant No. 2), Smt. Shahnaj (applicant No. 3), Smt. Shamsad (applicant No. 3) and Sharif (applicant No. 4). Proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3645 of 2004, State v. Shafiq and others, u/s 498A, 323 and 506, I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D. P. Act, Police Station Sipri Bazar, district Jhansi, pending before learned Ist, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi is hereby quashed in respect of these applicants.

This application is dismissed in respect of Smt. Saidan Begum (applicant No. 1) and Shafiq Ansari (applicant No. 6) who are mother-in-law and husband respectively. Trial Magistrate is directed to proceed with the case against them in accordance with law but he is directed to decide the bail prayers of these two applicants on the same day, on which day it is moved by them in the aforesaid case.