Court No. - 14
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25291 of 2011 Applicant :- Devraj Singh And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Kashi Naresh Mishra,Raj Singh
Hon'ble Abhai Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed by the applicants for quashing of the complaint case no. 1412 of 2010, Manoj Kumar Vs. Devraj Singh & Others, pending the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Aligarh, whereby the cognizance has been taken against the applicants under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.Lodha, District Aligarh.
It is the submission of the learned counsel for the applicants that marriage of daughter of applicant no. 1 took place with opposite party no. 2 in the year 2009. As the daughter of the applicant no. 1 was not kept properly and dowry was demanded by the opposite party no. 2, an F.I.R. was lodged on 30.05.2010 against the opposite party no. 2 and his family members and a charge-sheet has been submitted in that F.I.R.
The proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was also initiated by the daughter of the applicant no. 1 against opposite party no. 2 vide application dated 24.01.20 1 for maintenance. Then another F.I.R. dated 01.11.2010 has been filed by the applicant no. 1 under Sections 147, 420, 467 and 468 I.P.C., against the opposite party no. 2 and his family members wherein it has been alleged that signatures of the daughter of applicant no. 1 was taken on the blank paper forcefully and a divorce petition was filed on forged and fabricated papers on behalf of opposite party no. 2 against daughter of the applicant on the basis of some compromise.
The present F.I.R. against the applicants is counterblast and has been filed on false and fabricated grounds. No such incident has happened. The opposite parties are the residents of Aligarh whereas the complainants are the residents of Bulandshahr. The story is unbelievable. After enquiry under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the applicants were summoned under Sections 323, 504 and 506 by Magistrate whereas the allegations under Section 307 and 392 I.P.C., were not found correct.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that there is specific allegation in the complaint and the allegations of the complaint are being supported by the witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that the compromise that has been alleged in the F.I.R. dated 01.11.2010 was filed by the daughter of the applicant no. 1 and there is no forgery in the matter. It is also the submission of learned counsel that in a subsequent incident opposite party no. 2 was severely beaten by applicant and opposite party no. 2 received as many as seven injuries.
From the facts and circumstances referred above, it can be said that the daughter of applicant no. 1 as well as applicant no. 1 have initiated proceedings against opposite party no. 2 and his family members with regard to the dowry, cruelty and for maintenance. Charge-sheet has already been submitted in the case of forgery.
Keeping in view the above facts, it is evident that facts in the complaint are trivial in nature. The allegations under Section 392 and 307 I.P.C. were not found correct. There is no injury report in respect of the incident. The incident is of District Aligarh whereas the applicants are the residents of district Bulandshahr and it cannot be believed that the applicants will go to the place of the opposite parties and will commit such trifle act.
The Apex Court in the case of M/s. Pepsi Foods Ltd. vs. Special Judicial Magistrate and Others; (1998) 5 SCC, 749 clearly observed that a criminal process cannot be initiated by just producing two witnesses in the matter.
From the facts and circumstances and on the basis of submissions of the rival counsels, it can very well be said that the complaint which is being filed on behalf of opposite party no. 2 is false and fabricated and has been filed just to pressurize the applicants. In complaint charges under Sections 307 & 392 IPC were not found correct by the Magistrate at the time of passing summoning order. Rest allegations are of assault by applicants from fist and kicks. No injury report is there. Seeing the narration and allegation the story is improbable and unbelievable. If persons have come to give lesson then some overt action must be there. Whole story is full of lie and cannot be accepted on the basis of two tutored witnesses, more so when opposite party no.
2 is accused of several offences and culprit of not maintaining matrimonial obligations. Charge-sheet has already been submitted in the forgery case and prima facie it cannot be said that the allegations against the opposite party no. 2 is false.
So far as the second incident is concerned wherein the opposite party no. 2 has received several injuries, the same cannot be considered for disposal of the present case.
Consequently, in view of the submissions and the facts which are borne out from the records the proceedings initiated in Case No. 1412 of 2010, Manoj Kumar Vs. Devraj Singh & Others, pending the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Aligarh under Sections Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.Lodha, District Aligarh are hereby quashed.
The application is disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 27.4.2018 VR