SALEEM AND ANR. Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.
LAWS(ALL)-2012-1-700
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on January 13,2012

Saleem And Anr. Appellant
VERSUS
State of U.P. And Anr. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Rajesh Dayal Khare, J. - (1.) HEARD Learned Counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State -respondent. The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 660/9 of 2010 arising out of Case Crime No. 331 of 2009, under Sections 498 -A, 364 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, PS Baniyather, district Moradabad pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Moradabad and also for quashing the charge sheet dated 11.09.2009 filed in the aforesaid case.
(2.) IT is contended by the Learned Counsel for the applicants that the applicant No. 1 husband of daughter of opposite party No. 2 had filed an application before the concerned police station that his wife had gone with someone and after three days on 27.07.2009, first information report was lodged by opposite party No. 2 under the charged sections, in which after investigation, charge sheet has been filed. It is further contended by the Learned Counsel for the applicants that thereafter the girl was recovered from the residence of opposite party No. 2 and in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., copy of which has been filed as annexure 7 to the accompanying affidavit, wherein she has stated that she had gone to her relatives house because of the harassment of her in -laws and husband and, thereafter, went to her parents' house and in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., copy of which has been filed as annexure -8 to the accompanying affidavit she has stated that she was beaten by her husband and in -laws and she became unconscious and, thereafter when she gained consciousness she was at Roorki and thereafter went to her parents house.
(3.) IT is next contended by the Learned Counsel for the applicants that daughter of opposite party No. 2 herself had gone to her parents house regarding which written intimation was given by her husband on 19.03.2010 and in order to falsely implicate the applicants, opposite party No. 2 has initiated the present proceedings against the applicants, which is bad in law.;


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