- (1.) : 1. Through this application inherent power of the High Court has been invoked for quashing the first information report of Jainagar P.S. case no.78 of 2008 (G.R.No.622 of 2008) instituted under sections 147, 323, 341, 504, 498(A), 494, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma. The facts giving rise this application are that initially, a complaint was lodged by the complainant -opposite party no.2 stating therein that she was married to Upendra Gope (petitioner no.4) and came to her in -laws place where after few days, the husband as well as all the members of her in -laws place started putting forth of demand of Hero Honda Motor Cycle, Rs.3,00,000/ -and also some ornaments and in order to get the demand fulfilled, she was subjected to torture and at one point of time, accused persons even had hatched up a plan to kill her and the other day, she was driven out of the house. However, with the intervention of the members of Panchayat, she came to her in -laws house but the accused persons again started subjecting her to torture and the other day they took her signature on a blank piece of paper. Thereupon the matter was brought to Panchayat wherein accused persons were directed to return all the valuables of the complainant but the accused persons did not abide by that decision taken in the Panchayat and therefore, there was no option left with the complainant but to return to her fathers house and taking advantage of that, husband took another marriage. Thereafter accused persons came to the house of the father of the complainant and threatened the complainant not to come to their place. The said complaint was sent to the concerned police station for its institution and investigation. Accordingly, a case was instituted.
(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that marriage of the complainant with petitioner no.4 was solemnized on 8.6.2003 and on the day of the marriage itself it came to the knowledge of the petitioner that complainant is of unsound mind and, therefore, he made complaint with the parents of the complainant as to why they have cheated him in that manner and then complainant was taken back with the assurance that she would be back here after being cured fully. Subsequently, in the year 2003, a petition was filed in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Hazaribagh for declaration of the marriage as nullity which was registered as M.T.S No.79 of 2003. Thereupon a notice was issued but when the complainant did not appear, the matter was fixed for ex -parte hearing and on 19.10.2004, marriage was declared as null and void. Thereafter the complainant filed Misc. case bearing no. 3 of 2006 for setting aside the ex -parte decree but that was dismissed on 3.4.2008 and when the decree granted in favour of petitioner no.4 attained its finality, a complaint case was lodged on 10.8.2008 only to wreak vengeance and to harass the petitioner. Thus, from the facts stated above, it is evidently clear that the instant case has been lodged with ulterior motive and, therefore, in view of the decision rendered in a case of State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others [1992 (Supp) (1) SCC 335], the first information report is fit to be quashed. As against this, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 submits that without there being any service of the notice of the matrimonial proceeding, petitioner no.4 got an ex -parte order which was challenged but unfortunately, Misc. case was rejected but against that order, writ application has been filed which is pending and that the allegations made in complaint do constitute offences and hence, first information report does not warrant to be quashed by this Court. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is evidently clear that complainant brought this case after her marriage with the petitioner no.4 was declared as null and void in the year 2004 itself which subsequently was sought to be set aside but the complainant remained unsuccessful. Thereafter this case was lodged which, in the facts and circumstances, can certainly be said to have been attended with mala fide and has been lodged maliciously with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance and as such, the instant first information report, in view of the ratio laid down in the case of State of Haryana and other vs. Bhajan Lal and others (supra) is fit to be quashed. Accordingly, first information report of Jainagar P.S. case no.78 of 2008 (G.R.No.622 of 2008) is hereby quashed.
(3.) IN the result, this application is allowed.;