In a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash proceedings for dowry harassment and related offences, the Single Judge held allegations showed necessary trial was required. No abuse of process existed. The petition was dismissed.
Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings was dismissed.
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.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5578 of 2008
ORDER:
1) This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash proceedings in C.C.No.43 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sirpur.
2) The petitioners herein are the accused Nos. 1 to 4, the first respondent is the complainant and the second respondent is the de facto complainant in the calendar case. For convenience sake, I refer the parties as they are arrayed before the lower Court.
On 17-05-2006, the marriage of de-facto complainant with the first accused was performed by her parents. Then her parents gave dowry and articles to the first accused. They lived happily only for two months. Later, the first accused started harassing her physically and mentally demanding her to pay additional dowry of Rs.20,000/-. Further her in-laws i.e., the 2nd and 3rd accused also joined hands with the first accused in harassing her for additional dowry. Further, the first accused developed illegal intimacy with one Geetanjali and continued to harass her on petty issues. Further, on 20-10-2007 at about 8 o’ clock, the first accused confined her in bathroom and closed it. Therefore, the accused committed offences punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 114 I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act 1961.
The facts of the case amply provide that the accused involved in harassing the de-facto complainant for additional dowry, which is purely a question of law to be decided. Unless
necessary trial is conducted it is difficult to come to any conclusion in that regard.
Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be resorted to only when there is abuse of process of law and un-necessary harassment of the accused, which is not the case here now. Therefore, there are no merits in this case.
In the result, the petition is dismissed.
G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY,J
Dt. 07.04.2011 Pn/lvl
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5578 of 2008
Dt. 07.04.2011
2 issues framed by the court
Whether quashing proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is permissible where facts provide for dowry harassment necessitating trial.
Whether there is abuse of process of law or unnecessary harassment of the accused justifying quashing.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Accused Nos. 1 to 4
Complainant
De facto complainant
G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
