Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 33 (MP)

Jyoti v. State of M. P.

2016-01-11

N.K.GUPTA

body2016
ORDER 1. The applicant has moved the present petition under section 482 of the CrPC to quash the proceedings of the trial Court relating to Crime No.167 of 2010 registered at Police Station Bahodapur (District Gwalior) for offence under sections 498A, 506 read with section 34 of IPC and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. Facts of the case, in short, are that the respondent No.2 had lodged a criminal complaint against her husband and family members and also lodged against the applicant, who was residing with her husband in live-in-relationship that they were torturing her for demand of dowry and ousted from the house. 3. After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be apparent that the applicant Jyoti does not fall within the purview of “relative of the husband”. In this connection judgment passed by the apex Court in the case of “U. Suvetha v. State by Inspector of Police and another” [(2009) 6 SCC 757], may be referred, in which it is held that a person can be relative of the husband if he or she is connected by blood or marriage or adoption. “Girlfriend” or “concubine” being not connected by blood or marriage shall not be considered as relative of the husband. The offence of section 498A of IPC and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act cannot be committed by a stranger and, therefore, in the light of judgment passed by the apex Court in case of U. Suvetha (supra), such crime could not be registered against the applicant. It is nowhere mentioned by the complainant that the applicant gave any threat to her, hence, prima facie no offence under section 506 of IPC is made out against the applicant. 4. On the basis of aforesaid discussion, it would be apparent that no alleged case is made out against the applicant and she is bound to face a trial without any reason. Under these circumstances, in the light of judgment passed by the apex Court in the case of “State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others” [1992 SCC (Cri) 426], it is a good case in which criminal case registered against the applicant Jyoti should be quashed. 5. Under these circumstances, in the light of judgment passed by the apex Court in the case of “State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others” [1992 SCC (Cri) 426], it is a good case in which criminal case registered against the applicant Jyoti should be quashed. 5. Consequently, petition under section 482 of the CrPC filed by the applicant Jyoti daughter of Shri Rajendra Choudhary is hereby allowed. Crime No.167 of 2010 registered at Police Station Bahodapur, (District Gwalior) against the applicant Jyoti only is hereby quashed. 6. Copy of the order be sent to the trial Court to drop the proceedings against the applicant Jyoti.