R.K.Dash, J. - (1.) Ours is a male dominated society where crimes against women are on the rise. There has been onslaught on their liberties through, birde burning and Tdowry death. These crimes are affront to the human dignity. So in order to curb such crimes, the law makers in their anxiety have brought about several legislations providing harsher punishment. Yet, the laws could not act as a deterrent to check the crime graph. In many cases guilty goes unpunished. Since many years woman is not treated at par with the man in all walks of life. For this blame should go to the social reformers and law makers. The unequal treatment meted out to her emanates from the laws enacted by the legislature. Son and daughter are not treated equal. A son has a right in the ancestral property by birth, whereas a daughter does not have of such right. Under Hindu Succession Act, 1956 she gets a share from her fatherTs share only after the demise of her father, whereas a son by birth acquires right in the ancestral property. No doubt under the aforesaid Act, she is given the status of a Class I heir but she cannot claim partition of the dwelling house until the male members choose to divide. She is only entitled to right of residence in the dwelling house if she is unmarried or has been deserted by her husband or is widow. Why this unequal treatment? Are not the law makers obliged to bring out change with regard to the rights of a daughter in the ancestral property? A girl after marriage feels helpless if for no fault of her own she is thrown out of the matrimonial home by her husband and other family members. Her life becomes hell and her miseries know no bounds if her parents are not alive. She blames her fate and the Almighty. If she is not self sufficient, she does not get square meal a day and shelter over her head. She runs to the law court for maintenance, but the mechanism prevalent in the justice delivery system does not redress her grievance within a reasonable time. She is harassed and humiliated. We are, therefore, of the view that in order to check crime against women, our law makers should approach to the problem and bring out suitable legislation providing her a share in the husbands property immediately after marriage.
(2.) Now coming to the case in hand. a reading of the allegations made in the First Information Report show how the informant was cruelly treated by her husband and other family members. She moved the law court .for maintenance and initiated criminal proceeding against her husband who in turn filed a suit for divorce in the family court. By exercising undue influence she was persuaded to compromise the proceedings and bring the same to a close. Desirous to revive the shattered marital life, she entered into a compromise but subsequently, shewas betrayed by no other than her husband. He alongwith other family members ill treated her. both mentally and physically which rose to such a height that compelled her to take the help of law. She approached the police and lodged FIR giving the details. On the basis of the said report. Case Crime No. 315 of 2001 under Sections 498A. 323, 504, 506, 468 and 471 I.P.C. was registered at P.S. Bilhaur District Kanpur Nagar. 3. Keeping in mind all the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the awful story narrated in the FIR. we are of the view that any interference in the investigation of the aforesaid case would, cause injustice to the informant.
(3.) In view of the discussion made. we are not inclined to quash the First Information Report in exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. In the result, writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. Petition dismissed.;