Court allowed F.I.R. quashing petition. Petitioner husband accused under dowry sections; deceased wife died of natural causes confirmed by doctor; no injury found.
Impugned F.I.R. and subsequent proceedings are hereby quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 16780 of 2019
Petitioner :- Asha Devi And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- B.N.Singh,Manish Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dharmendra Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard Sri B.N.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri D.K. Singh, learned counsel for the private respondent and Sri A.R. Chaurasia, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer for quashing the impugned FIR dated 17.05.2019, in Case Crime No. 152 of 2019, under Sections 304-B/498-A IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Jalalpur, District Jaunpur.
Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the respondent no.3 married his daughter, namely, Rekha within one Amar Bahadur Yadav, son of petitioner no.4 in the year 2017. He states that the deceased who was the wife of co-accused Amar Bahadur Yadav died of natural death due to Myocardial infarction (heard attack). Dr. Sanjeev Kumar Yadav, who has filed affidavit in compliance of the Court's order dated 17.06.2019 has also stated and appeared before the Court and had explained the cause of death of the deceased. The postmortem report of the deceased shows that the deceased has not received any anti mortem injury on her person. He further states that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. Though, no offence as has been mentioned in the F.I.R. is made out against the petitioners, hence the present F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Learned counsel for the private respondent no.4 states that though it is a prayer for quashing of FIR but could not dispute the death of the deceased.
In view of the above, the petition stands allowed, the impugned FIR and all subsequent proceedings taken against the petitioners in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed.
There shall however be no order as to costs.
(Raj Beer Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 24.7.2019/A. Tripathi
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an FIR under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC is maintainable when the deceased died of natural causes without ante-mortem injuries.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Asha Devi And 3 Others
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Ramesh Sinha
Raj Beer Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
