ANITA SINGH Vs. VINOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
LAWS(UTN)-2012-7-71
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on July 20,2012

Smt. Anita Singh And Ors. Appellant
VERSUS
VINOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. - (1.) ALL the above titled petitions are being disposed of herein, as the same has arisen out of the same order of cognizance dated 12.12.2008, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, Distt. U.S. Nagar, in criminal case no. 1308 of 2008, Vinod Kumar Srivastava Vs. Rohit Chandra & others. 2 Petition no. 253 of 2009 has been filed by Smt. Anita Singh and Smt. Vineeta Saxena, who are the sisters of mother -in -law of Mrs. Anchal (bride). Petition No. 299 of 2009 has been filed by Vijay Bahadur Srivastava (father -in -law, now deceased, as informed by learned counsel) and Smt. Shashi Srivastava (mother -in -law).
(2.) PETITION no. 302 of 2009 has been filed by Rohit Chandra (husband of Mrs. Anchal). Having heard learned counsel for both the parties, it transpires that wedding of Ms. Anchal (daughter of complainant) was solemnized with Rohit Chandra on 18.4.2006 at Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. She left her parental house to espouse Rohit Chandra at his Lucknow residence. After a couple of months of marriage, she was allegedly maltreated at the hands of all the petitioners/accused persons, who began to advert their insatiable conduct for demand of additional dowry in sundry ways. They used to tease and torture the victim in various mariner, which has been narrated in the complaint. Due to this atrocious attitude, at the hands of all the accused persons, she was constrained to leave her matrimonial house on 11.8.2008. Thereafter, she came to reside at her native place at Bazpur on 12.8.2008 and is living there since then.
(3.) IT was further alleged that on 27.8.2008, all the accused persons, at about 8 -9 PM, came and entered forcibly at the native place of complainant Vinod Kumar Srivastava (father of Smt. Anchal) and strived to drag the victim forcibly with them, voraciously demanding cash and car. At that time, the complainant was not present in his house but was at Nainital on account of some official work. While leaving the house, the accused persons threatened to kill the victim in future. Soon thereafter, she went to the P.S. Bazpur to lodge the report but the same could not be lodged. She also sent a report to the S.S.P., U.S. Nagar but all went in vain. Thereafter on 20.10.2008, the respondent Vinod Kumar Srivastava (father of victim) lodged a complaint with the above facts. He examined himself u/s 200 Cr.P.C. whereas his two witnesses, namely, Anchal and a neighbour Tara Dutt Joshi were examined u/s 202 Cr.P.C. Learned Magistrate, having gone through the facts of the complaint, supported by the witnesses in their statements, passed the impugned order of cognizance, asking all the petitioners to stand trial for the offences under Section 498A, 506 and 452 IPC r/w Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Learned counsel for all the petitioners has argued that Smt. Anchal has again lodged a first information report on 28.12.2012 at Women's Police Station, Lucknow for the similar offences, thereby adding Section 494 IPC and the same has been registered under the crime no. 44 of 2012 at the above said police station. The additional allegation, made by Smt. Anchal, is that her husband Rohit Chandra, without having a decree of legal divorce, wedded with another woman, and thus, has committed an offence punishable u/s 494 IPC. She has also averred that she was running from pillar to post in order to get justice against her husband and in -laws but the same could not yield any positive result.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.