Criminal petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash FIR under Section 498-A IPC. Court dismissed quash request but directed police to follow Arunesh Kumar guidelines and issue Section 41-A notice.
Directions to police to issue notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and follow Arnesh Kumar guidelines while permitting investigation.
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
MONDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI ]USTICE T.VINOD KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6202 OF 2020
Between:
Jasvinder Kour Saluja, W/o. Kuldeep Singh Saluja Age 58 yrs, Occ.House wife, R/o.109, B Wing, Rajhans complex,Charwada Road, Near Mangalmurthy Store, Vapi Town, Gujarath-396191.
...PETITIONER/A2
AND
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.Cpraying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may bepleased to quash the Crime.No.53/2020 of dated. 28-02-2020 on the file of SangaReddy Rural Police station, at Sanga Reddy for the offence U/Sec. 498(4), ofIPC
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2020
Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.Cpraying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may bepleased to stay of all further proceedings including arrest ofpetitioner in Crime.No.53/2020 dated 28.02-2020 on the file of Sanga Reddy Ruralpolice station, at SangaReddy for the offences U/Sec. 498(A), of IPCpending disposal of the criminalpetition
This Petition coming on for hearing, uponperusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of SMT. T.PUSHPARANI Advocate for the Petitioner and the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No1. and of Sri PRAMOD SINGH Advocate for the RespondentNo. 2
The Court made the following: ORDER
/
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.6202 of 2020
JORDER:
This criminal petition is flled under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.53 of 2020 dated 28.02.2020 on the file of Sangareddy Rural Police Station, Sangareddy, registered for the offence under Section 498-A IPC, wherein thepetitioner is arrayed as accused No.2.
2
son, who thereafter started harassing respondent No.2 - de facto complainant at the behest oF his mother, thepetitioner herein, demanding to get additional dowry. It is further submitted by the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 that respondent No.2' de facto complainant was sent back to her sister's house by arranging to and fro air tickets, however, upon coming to India, the return ticket was cancelled by the petitioner's son, i.e. the husband of respondent No.2 - de facto complainant, and thereafter, they are not even in contact with the de facto complainant. Even the efforts of the respondent no.2-de facto complainant to contact thepetitioner and her son i.e., the husband of the de facto complainant,proved futile. Hence, the respondent no,2 was constrained to approach the pollce authoritles and lodged a complaint for causing harassment and demanding additional dowry. Based on the complaint made, the respondent authorities have registered crime and therefore, this court should not interdict in the investigation in to the crime registered.
I (20 1.1) B SCC 273
?
3
directed to issue notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and strictly follow the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in ARNESH KUMARS case (supra). Further, the petitloner shall co-operate with the investigation by furnishing the required information and necessary documents as may be requisitioned by the investigating agency.
B. Subject to the above directions, the criminal petition is disposed of.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in the light of
this final order.
I
//TRUECOPYI I
SD/- CH. VENKATESHWARLU, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
SECTIONOFFICER
To,
:. one ccto sMT T PUSHPARANIAdvocate [oPU-c]
^r;--
HIGH COURT wt(, DAtEDzt4lLZl2O2O
ORDER CRLP.No.6202 of 2O2O
1 H E s 14
oo 2 2 DEC lrflt) z
+ *
DISPOSING OF THE CRLPMINAL PETITION
si/. ,
Bcrp'n4.
q, \r-\r-o"a
)r
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interdict police proceedings in matrimonial harassment cases registered under Section 498-A IPC.
Whether the respondent police authorities are directed to issue notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. during investigation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Arnesh Kumar v. State of BiharApplied¶29
ARNESH KUMAR V. STATE OF BIHAR
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Jasvinder Kour Saluja
The State of Telangana Rep by its Public Prosecutor
Loveneeth Sardar
T. Vinod Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
