Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1102 (JHR)

Vidisa Nupur v. State of Jharkhand

2016-07-20

RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

body2016
ORDER : Heard Mr. P.C. Tripathi, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Mahesh Tewari, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2. 2. In this application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings in connection with Bariatu P.S. Case No. 368 of 2010 including the order dated 06.05.2013 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi by which cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable under Sections 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 3. It has been submitted by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the allegations which have been made in the First Information Report are general and omnibus in nature. Learned senior counsel submits that the petitioner is the married-sister-in-law of the deceased and only fleeting reference has been made with respect to the demand of dowry made by her which cannot be by any stretch of imagination be believable. Learned senior counsel further submits that initially the case was instituted under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code but subsequently in course of investigation it came to light that the deceased had died due to Cardio respiratory failure as a result of which charge-sheet was ultimately submitted under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Learned senior counsel further submits that in course of the investigation no evidence has come to depict the complicity of the petitioner in torturing the deceased and demanding dowry. In support of his contention that the informant has made an exaggerated version of the incident and has tried to rope in all the family members of the husband of the deceased has relied on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Preeti Gupta And Another vs. State of Jharkhand And Another reported in (2010) 3 SCC 473. 4. Mr. Mahesh Tewari, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2., has submitted that the First Information Report itself specifies the role played by the petitioner in demanding dowry from the informant. He has also referred to the various letters sent by the deceased to her parents wherein also such allegation has been levelled and in fact the said letters were sent to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory wherein it was concluded that the letters were indeed written by the deceased. He has also referred to the various letters sent by the deceased to her parents wherein also such allegation has been levelled and in fact the said letters were sent to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory wherein it was concluded that the letters were indeed written by the deceased. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that in view of the specific allegation levelled against the petitioner, the present application is liable to be dismissed. 5. It appears from the First Information Report that the parents-in-law, husband as well as the married-sister-in-law i.e. the petitioner have been made an accused with the allegation of demand of dowry and committing torture upon the deceased. The various letters which have been written by the deceased addressed to her parents sufficiently suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the offence as apart from there being general allegations levelled against all the accused persons specific allegation of demand of dowry and torture has also been levelled against the petitioner. 6. The report of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory has substantiated the fact that the letters which are being relied upon by the prosecution were indeed written by the deceased. The case of Preeti Gupta And Another vs. State of Jharkhand And Another (Supra) which has been referred to by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner has no applicability in the present case in view of the specific allegation levelled against the petitioner coupled with the evidence which has been produced by the prosecution with respect to such allegation. 7. Moreover, after conclusion of the investigation the case against the petitioner was found to be proved which led to submission of charge-sheet and subsequently taking of cognizance by the learned court below. From the material which has been brought on record, there are specific indication with respect to the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of offence and in such circumstance, therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the criminal proceedings as a result of which the present application sans merit is, hereby, dismissed. 8. However, the petitioner is at liberty to raise all the points at the appropriate stage. 9. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.