Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 954 (RAJ)

Vijay Singh v. State of Rajasthan

2016-07-06

KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

body2016
JUDGMENT : Mr. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying that the order dated 19.1.2015 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, No.1, Bharatpur, whereby cognizance of offences under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC has been taken against the petitioner be set aside along with the order dated 11.12.2015 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases), Bharatpur, whereby the order dated 19.1.2015 was affirmed in the revision. 2. Mr. Biri Singh Sinsinwar, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner no.1 Vijay Singh is husband of deceased Smt. Anita, whereas, the petitioner no.2 Smt. Raghunathi @ Manto is wife of elder brother of the husband, whereas the petitioner nos. 3 and 4 namely Vikram and Udai Singh respectively are sons of elder brother of the husband and the petitioner nos. 5 and 6 namely Smt. Hemu and Smt. Ramo are respective wives of the petitioner nos. 3 and 4. It is further submitted that the petitioner no.7 Smt. Sajna is mother-in-law, the petitioner no.8 Smt. Ramwati is married sister of the husband and the petitioner no.9 Bhagwan Singh is husband of married sister. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that Smt. Anita was married with Vijay Singh on 2.12.2009 at Mahendra Colony, Bharatpur as per Hindu rites and customs. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted in the FIR allegations regarding demand of dowry and harassment to the aggrieved wife have been levelled. 4. Mr. N.K. Singhal, the learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the petitioners being resident of a joint family had harassed Smt. Anita. Thereafter, compromise was arrived and Smt. Anita was rehabilitated in the matrimonial home, where she due to cruelty inflicted by the petitioners, committed suicide and as per report of Post Mortem, she had died as a result of asphyxia due to hanging. It is submitted that qua the subsequent incident of unnatural death, a separate FIR for offence under Section 304-B IPC has already been lodged. 5. So far the present FIR is concerned, it has been alleged by the aggrieved wife that her husband was not on talking terms with her and he used to take meals cooked by Smt. Hemu. It is submitted that qua the subsequent incident of unnatural death, a separate FIR for offence under Section 304-B IPC has already been lodged. 5. So far the present FIR is concerned, it has been alleged by the aggrieved wife that her husband was not on talking terms with her and he used to take meals cooked by Smt. Hemu. She further alleged that Vikram Singh was serving Indian Army and as and when he used to come on leave, he used to cause her beating. 6. In the present FIR for trial of offences under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC, aggrieved wife has named nine members of the joint family which include wife of elder brother of husband (Jethani) and her two sons (sons of Jethani), wives of sons of elder brother of husband (daughter in law of Jethani), mother-in-law and married sister of the husband (Nanad) and husband of the sister of the husband (Nandoi). In the present case, there is large scale implication of the family members of the husband. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the case of Preeti Gupta & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Anr, (2010) 7 SCC 667 , to contend that provisions of matrimonial offences are being misused and all members of family are being implicated. It is urged that it is case of over implication. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the present petition is dismissed qua petitioner no.1 Vijay Singh, husband and Smt. Sajna the petitioner no.7, mother-in-law of the complainant. 9. However, the present petition is accepted against the petitioner no. 2 (Jethani) i.e. wife of elder brother of husband, petitioner no.3 and 4 sons of elder brother of husband and the petitioner nos. 5 and 6 wives of petitioner no.3 and 4, Smt. Ramwati the petitioner no.8 married sister (Nanad) of the husband and the petitioner no.9 Bhagwan Singh husband of married sister (Nanadoi) as these persons have nothing to gain from the alleged demand of dowry and there is no reason for them to inflict cruelty upon Anita aggrieved wife. The order of cognizance along with order passed by the revisional court qua the petitioner nos. 2 to 6, 8 and 9 is set aside. The order of cognizance along with order passed by the revisional court qua the petitioner nos. 2 to 6, 8 and 9 is set aside. However considering that the petitioner no.7 is an old lady, her personal appearance before the court below is exempted subject to filing of an undertaking in which following conditions shall be incorporated:- (i) That the petitioner no.7 shall specify in the undertaking that she shall appear before the court at the time of framing of charges, recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and at the time of delivery of the judgment; (ii) That the petitioner no.7 shall also specify in the undertaking that evidence recorded in her absence but in the presence of her counsel shall be binding upon her. (iii) That the petitioner no.7 shall also specify in the undertaking that she shall appear before the trial court as and when trial court direct her to do so.