PIYUSHLATA THAWAIT Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Bhupendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr.Avinash K. Mishra, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.1/State and Mr.Dinesh Yadav, learned counsel holding the brief of Mr.Shivendu Pandya, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

(2.) By way of this petition under Sec. 482 CrPC, the petitioners have prayed for following relief:

(3.) Brief facts, necessary for disposal of this case, are that a written report was lodged by respondent No.2 i.e. complainant Smt.Smita Mahobia W/o. Shri Alok Thawait at Police Station Mahila Thana, Raipur that her marriage was solemnized on 10/2/2015 at Raipur with Shri Alok Thawait and she had given adequate dowry including air conditioner, sofa, dining table etc. and also given gold and silver ornaments, but immediately after the marriage, her husband and mother-in-law i.e. petitioner No.1 started harassing her by saying that she had not brought adequate dowry and cash amount and she was subjected to cruelty with demand of mobile phone, cash etc., even she was beaten by her husband many times. She has also stated that even when she was carrying pregnancy she was again beaten by her husband and mother-in-law in connection with taking dowry. She has also stated that the said torture and harassment was continued at Raipur and Bilaspur also. Even, the complainant tried to settle her matrimonial dispute with the help of Sakhi Counsling Center, but the counseling was also failed and ultimately the complainant had lodged the written report at Police Station Mahila Thana, Raipur where the offence as aforementioned was registered. During the course of investigation, statements under Sec. 161 CrPC of Smt.Smita Mahobia (complainant), Smt.Shail Mahobia (mother of the complainant), Kailash Chandra Mahobia, Sweta Mahobia and other witnesses and also independent witnesses namely Pramendra Singh and Dr.Pravina Mishra have been recorded. After completion of usual investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the jurisdictional criminal Court and now the matter is pending before the competent jurisdictional criminal Court against the present petitioners where they are facing trial.