- (1.) This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of charge sheet dated 9.6.2010 in case crime no.2781 of 2009, u/s 498-A, 406, 323, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, district Ghazipur.
(2.) List has been revised. Despite repeated calls none has appeared on behalf of the opposite party no.2. Sri Arvind Kumar Shukla, Learned counsel for the applicant is present along with learned AGA. This application is of year 2010. In the wake of heavy pendency of cases in this Court where dockets are already bursting on their seams there is no justifiable reason to further procrastinate the matter. Therefore, the Court is proceeding to decide this case on merits on the basis of its record taking the assistance of learned A.G.A. representing the State.
(3.) The counsel for the applicant submits that the case at hand is an out come of false implication wherein the opposite party no.2 who was married to some another person Mangroo Chaurasiya in the year 1992 has lodged the F.I.R. against the applicant with allegations that she and the applicant had got married about 12 years before in accordance with Hindu rites and rituals in a temple and they were living as husband and wife but the applicant had subjected her with all sort of cruelty and harassment and had got her abortion done on five earlier occasions against her will and being posted as Constable in police department, the applicant continuously gives threat to her life and has ultimately snatched her mobile and one lac seventy thousand rupees by committing marpit and has eventually abandoned her. Submission of the counsel is that actually the applicant is a married man who leads a family having a wife namely Indu and two minor children and in fact he has neither any concern with the opposite party no.2 nor has any relation with her as alleged in the F.I.R. and the criminal case in question has been set up at the instance of one person Visheshwar Mishra who is inimical with applicant and the opposite party no.2 has been used as a tool to falsely implicate the applicant. Submission is that the entire criminal case set up against the applicant is false and frivolous and is liable to be quashed in as much as no offence u/s 498-A I.P.C. is made out for the reason that the opposite party no.2, who was married to one Mangroo Chaurasiya earlier and has not been divorced, cannot be treated to be the wife of applicant and if there is no legal marriage in between applicant and opposite party no.2, the offence u/s 498-A I.P.C. would not have any application in the present matter. The counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the pronouncement of Supreme Court in Shiv Charan Lal Verma and another Vs. State of M.P., 2007 15 SCC 369, Preeti Gupta and another Vs. State of Jharkhand and another, 2010 7 SCC 667, U. Suvetha vs. State by Inspector of Police and another, 2009 3 SCC(Cri) 36.;