Decided on November 20,2013

Furkan And Five Others Appellant
State of Uttarakhand and another Respondents


- (1.) The applicants, by means of present petition moved under Section 482 Cr. P.C., seek to quash the charge-sheet no. 176 of 2009 dated 11.08.2009, summoning order dated 19.04.2010 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 208 of 2009, State vs. Furkan and others, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Vikas Nagar, District Dehradun.
(2.) Informant (respondent no. 2 herein) lodged a first information report on 21.07.2009 at PS Sahas Pur against seven accused persons including the applicants for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. After the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against the accused-applicants for the selfsame offences. Cognizance was taken. Accused persons were summoned to face the trial. Aggrieved against the same, present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was moved.
(3.) The informant (respondent no. 2) wrote in the first information report that she was married to the applicant no. 1 Furkan on 31.12.2007 according to Muslim rites and rituals at Himachal Pradesh. Her parents gave the articles in the marriage to the best of their capacity, but soon after her marriage, the applicant no. 1 and her in-laws started harassing her for want of bringing sufficient dowry. She was assaulted and harassed. A panchayat was convened, but the cruelty to her continued to remain un-abated. She was assaulted very badly on 19.06.2009 and was ousted from her matrimonial home. She sustained injuries. She also filed injury report along with the FIR. A prima facie case against the accused persons for the offences complained of against them was therefore, made out on the basis of allegations levelled against them in the first information report. Whereas, the applicant no. 1 was the husband of respondent no.2, applicants no. 2 & 3 were brothers-in-law (jeth) and applicants no. 4 to 6 were sisters-in-law (jethani) of respondent no. 2.;

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