SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Nitin vs State & Ors on 10 May, 2018

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1450 / 2018

Nitin Son of Shri Karanpal Singh, Aged About 37 Years, By Caste
Jat, Resident of House No. 236, Green Estate Modipuram, Merath,
Uttar Pradesh, Medical College, Merath, Uttar Pradesh.
—-Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan

2. Divya Singh Wife of Nitin Daughter of Kshetrapal Singh,
Resident of A-58, Rawla, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur.

3. Smt. Brijbala Wife of Shri Karanpal Singh, Aged About 67 Years,
By Caste Jat, Resident of House No. 236, Green Estate
Modipuram, Merath, Uttar Pradesh, Medical College, Merath, Uttar
Pradesh.
—-Respondents
__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. N.L. Joshi, Mr. Pakhat Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Panwar, PP
__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Judgment / Order
10/05/2018

This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has

been filed on behalf of the petitioner with a prayer for quashing of

the FIR No.17/2018 of Police Station Mahila Thana West Jodhpur

City for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 323 and

498-A IPC.

In the impugned FIR, the respondent No.2 has stated that

the marriage between her and the petitioner was solemnized on

29.11.2012, however, later on, after living with her for some time,

the petitioner started harassing her for less dowry. In the FIR,

certain incidents of particular dates of the years 2012, 2013,

2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 have been mentioned.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as a
(2 of 2)
[CRLMP-1450/2018]

matter of fact there is no demand of dowry on the part of the

petitioner at any point of time and the allegations levelled in the

impugned FIR are false. Learned counsel for the petitioner has

placed reliance on certain transcriptions of audio between him and

the respondent No.2 and submitted that from the reading of those

transcripts, it is clear that the respondent No.2 has filed the

impugned FIR with false allegations only with the intention to get

divorce and money from the petitioner.

Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted a factual report

dated 9.5.2018 wherein, it is mentioned that the police after

thorough investigation into the allegations levelled in the

impugned FIR has found involvement of the petitioner in

commission of crime for the offences punishable under Sections

498-A and 323 IPC, however, the police has not found involvement

of the petitioner in commission of crime for the offence punishable

under Section 406 IPC.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and after

going through the impugned FIR, I am not inclined to interfere in

the same as the allegations contained in the impugned FIR prima

facie do constitute cognizance offences against the petitioner.

Hence, this criminal misc. petition is dismissed.

The factual report dated 9.5.2018 be taken on record.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J.

Ms rathore

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please CLICK HERE to read Group Rules, If You agree then JOIN HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DVACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA24, 125 CrPc, 307, 313, 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509 etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh