KAILASH CHANDRA MAHESHWARI Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - Petitioners have filed this petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code") for quashing the criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 401 of 1998 pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sehore, and the order passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate on 4-12-1999 framing charge against them for the offences under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

(2.) Facts giving rise to this petition are that respondent No. 3, Smt. Sandhya was married to Sanjay Mahcshwari on 3-12-1991. On 4-3-1997 Ghanshyam Das, father of Sandhya, lodged a written report with the Superintendent of Police, Sehore, alleging that on 20-8-1996 he had submitted a written report to Police Kotwali, Sehore, but the police did not take any action against the accused persons and still her in-laws were harbouring ill will against her, therefore, he prayed stringent action against the those persons. He annexed the photo copy of a written report purporting to be made on 20-8-1996.

(3.) In the aforesaid copy of the alleged report the complainant alleged that on 14-7-1994 he had received a phone call from Radhelal (father of Sanjay) that Sandhya was not behaving properly and he asked him to take Sandhya from Sagar. After 2-3 days Shrivallabh, the brother of Sandhya. went there and brought her to Sehore. After sometime when Sandhya was sent to Sagar, her in- laws asked her to go back, whereupon she again came back to Sehore. On 4- 12-1994 when he, his wife Sandhya and Vishnu went to Sagar to talk to Sandhya's in-laws, father-in-law of Sandhya, assured them that they will talk to them when they would come to attend the marriage at Sehore. On 11-2-1994 Radhelal (father-in-law), Sanjay (husband) and Meera Devi (mother-in-law) came to Sehore and told him that since he (Ghanshyam) had given a house worth Rs. 10 lacs to his sister, he should also give a house at Sagar to them and unless he will give a house to them, they will not take Sandhya back to their house. On other occasions also this demand was repeated by the aforesaid persons.