VIJAY KRISHAN Vs. SOHAN LAL
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The petition under S.561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure is filed praying for the quashing of the complaint filed by Respondent Sohan Lal against the petitioners on July 8 1985 under Ss.498/366/ 365/109/506 read with S.34 of the R.P.C. which was registered initially in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu, which is presently tried by Munsiff Magistrate Ist Class, R.S. Pura.
(2.) The facts in brief for the disposal of the present petition are that respondent Sohan Lal alleging that petitioner No. 4 daughter of petitioner No. 1 on 2-6-1985 according to Hindu rites was married to him at Kathua and R.S. Pura. Pursuant to the marriage, his alleged wife came to village Jinder Melu, Tehsil, R.S. Pura to his relatives. On 3-6-1985 the petitioners along with some unidentified persons came to the house of the relatives of the respondent and took away the wife Madhu Bala with them on the pretext that she will be sent back on the next morning. When she did not return up to June 4, 1985, he rushed to Pathankot, found that the petitioners/accused persons have illegally confined the wife of respondent/petitioner No. 4 in the present petition and flatly refused to send back his wife, against her will and gave threats to kill the respondent. He also obtained the warrant under S.100 Cr. P.C. on 5-6-1985 from the court of Munsiff Magistrate Ist. Class, R.S. Pura, but to no effect. Thus the present complaint was filed on July 8, 1985 before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu under the above said sections. When the learned Magistrate on taking cognizance of the complaint issued warrants against the petitioners, wherein the petitioner Madhu Bala was also included as an accused being an abettor under S.109 of the R.P.C. Petitioner No. 1 father of Madhu Bala on 12-8-1985 appeared through counsel before learned Magistrate and submitted an application that the complaint is not entertainable. On that very day an application was also filed by the complainant that by mistake he could not sign the complaint,, hence permission be granted to him to sign the same, a certificate is also filed along with the complaint showing the performance of marriage of the Arya Samaj Kathua. The learned Magistrate on the statement of the complainant initially vide his order dated July 18, 1985 registered the complaint under Ss.498/109 of the R.P.C. and no other section of the Code.
(3.) The petitioners being aggrieved against the said complaint have filed the present petition on several grounds alleging therein that the Court at Jammu has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint, no grounds are made out under the provisions of the Code attracted by the learned Magistrate and that the complaint filed by the respondent was in fact a counter blast against the complaint filed earlier by petitioner No. 4 Madhu Bala against respondent, which she filed under Ss.365/366/342/506 of the I.P.C. in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kharar, District Ropar against the respondent Sohan Lal and one M.L. Zakhmi on June 13, 1985. In this complaint, it has been clearly alleged that respondent was a teacher at Shastri Model School, Mohali, who was known to the family of the petitioner No. 1, who was employed at Thermal Plant, Ropar. On a request of petitioner No. 4 Madhu Bala to respondent to help her in getting some job, he asked her to accompany him on 1-6-1985, whereby administered some liquor material, in a semiconscious condition got a mock marriage arranged in some Mandir and under the threat of her life on 3-6-1985, respondent took Madhu Bala to Pathankot for registration of marriage. It is further alleged that respondent also filed a criminal petition before Hon'ble Supreme Court, which in view of the counter-affidavit filed by petitioner No. 1 was dismissed on 12-3-986. On the above premises, the petitioners pray that the proceedings before Munsiff Magistrate Ist. Class, R.S. Pura pending against the petitioners be quashed under the provisions of S.561-A of the Cr. P.C. The petition is contested by the respondent.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.