SAGIR AHMAD Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
SAGIR AHMAD,SAGIR AHMAD S/O SHRI QADIR AHMAD,QADIR AHMAD S/O SHRI ALLAHDIN,RUKSHANA W/O SHRI QADIR AHMAD,SALIM S/O SAKHAWAT HUSSAIN,RIZWAN AHMAD S/O QADIR AHMAD,ANIS AHMAD S/O SHRI QADIR AHMAD C/O POLLO PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD.,IRFAN S/O JALALUDDIN
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND,STATE OF UTTARAKHAND, THROUGH SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME,SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DISTRICT U.S. NAGAR,STATION HOUSE OFFICER, P.S. KASHIPUR, DISTRICT U.S. NAGAR,FARHANAAZ @ PINKY D/O MUMTAZ AHMAD R/O MOHALLA AHAJAJ NAGAR
Click here to view full judgement.
PRAFULLA C.PANT, J. -
(2.) ) By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought quashing of the F.I.R. No. 295 of 2012, relating to offences punishable under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., and one punishable under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, at Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar.
) Petitioner No.1 is husband, petitioner No.2 is father in law, petitioner No.3 is mother in law, petitioner No.4 is cousin brother in law, petitioner Nos. 5 and 6 are brothers in law (DEVARS) and petitioner No.7 is brother in law (NANDOI) of the respondent No.4 Farhanaaz @ Pinkky (complainant).
) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that after TALAK was given by the petitioner No.1 to his wife (respondent No.4) on 17.05.2012, the First Information Report has been got lodged on 09.06.2012. It is pointed out that vague and general allegations are made against the petitioners by the complainant. It is also pointed out that petitioner No.6 Anis Ahmad, brother in law of the complainant works and lives in Solan, Himchal Pradesh. It is further pointed out that petitioner No.7 Irfan brother in law (Nandoi) works and lives in Sheopur in Madhya Pradesh. It is submitted that petitioner No.4 Salim cousin brother in law of the complainant, and he too has not been spared. It is contended that it is abuse of process of law to implicate innocent relatives of the husband of the complainant.
(3.) ) On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant submitted that there is specific allegation against the husband regarding cruelty committed by him.
) Admit the petition.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.