MyNation KnowledgeBase

Landmark Judgments and Articles on Law

Register to Download

Complaint u/s 3 (DP3) of Dowry prohibition act against wife

IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE A.C.M.M., TIS HAZARI

Complaint Case No. /2011 In the matter of:

Rajender Gupta
S/o Late Shri Jagannath Gupta
R/o:54B, Pkt: D1/C Janak Puri, New Delhi-110058 ……. Complainant

Versus

Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel & others …… Respondent

P S: Janakpuri.

COMPLAINT U/S 156(3) & 200 CR.P.C.

FOR REGISTERING A CASE FOR GIVING DOWRY AND ABETMENT TO THE GIVING OF DOWRY OF THEIR OWN, WITHOUT ANY DEMAND, U/S: 3 OF THE DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT 1961 AGAINST THE RESPONDENT.

HON’BLE SIR/MADAM, MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-

1. That a marriage took place on 22/01/2014 at Shubh Nimantran Banquet Hall at Janakpuri, New Delhi between Ashima Goel D/o Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel and Vipul Gupta S/o: Shri Rajender Gupta.

2. That though it was an arranged marriage processed through a matrimonial website www.shadi.com between the two well educated adults, earning handsome amounts and fully grownup soulmates Ashima Goel & Vipul Gupta, there was no question of demanding any dowry at all which is evident from the bare persual of the false Complaint/FIR also, as there is no such allegations of demand of any Dowry before or at the time of marriage by the complainant or any of his family members.

3. That though there was no demand of any dowry by the complainant or any of his family members, even then in a complainant (Annexure:1) dated 16/06/2014 made at Women Cell, Karnal by Mr. Chittaranjan Dev Goel, it is alleged that Mr. Chittaranjan Dev Goel had given enough dowry in his daughter Ashima’s marriage by spending about Rs. Forty Five (45) Lakhs.

4. That Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel, had categorically mentioned in the 1st Para of his complaint that “shadi par lag-bhag 45 lakh rupaye kharch kiye the, tatha kafee dan dahej diya tha”

5. Similarly Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel has again stated in the same complaint at 5th Para that, “he had also given Rs. Seven lakhs for a car in his daughter Ashima’s marriage.”

6. That again in a false complaint / FIR No: 962/2014 dated 31/08/2014 (Annexure: 2) frivolously got registered at PS: Janakpuri, New Delhi U/s: 323, 328, 342, 376, 498A, 406, 506, 34 IPC by Ms. Ashima Goel, against the complainant & his entire family, she had claimed that enough dowry was given by her parents in her marriage solemnized at Delhi on 22/01/2014 by spending about Rs. Forty Five (45) lakhs.

See also  Territorial jurisdiction,matrimonial offence in Section 498A IPC

7. That before this complaint at Women Cell, Karnal and FIR No: 962/2014 at PS: Janakpuri, I and my family members were thinking that the items given in Ashima’s marriage by her parents & relatives are her Stridhan or gifts given by relatives or are the household items purchased by Ashima out of her own salaries for her matrimonial house.

8. That only after this complaint at Women cell, Karnal as well as FIR No: 962/2014, PS: Janakpuri, I and my family members came to know that Mr Chittaranjan Dev Goel had given enough dowry in his daughter Ashima’s marriage, though it was never demanded by the complainant or any of his family members.

9. That whatever Stridhan or Dowry Articles, her father and relations gave to their daughter Ashima and also the Stridhan given to Ashima by my family, were taken/ received by Ashima and her parents on 02/07/2014 and kept in a locker opened exculsively in her name at HDFC Bank, Janakpuri Branch, New Delhi and has been reduced in

(i) Registered the case and took up the investigation OR
(ii) Directed ( Name of the I . O ): Rank:PIS Number: to take up the investigation ,OR
(iii)Refuse investigation due to: OR
(iv)Transferred to P . S ( name ): District:on point of jurisdiction .

F . I . R . read over to the complainant / informant , admitted to be correctly recorded and a copy given to the complainant / informant , free of cost :
R.O.A.C:writing as a Declaration (Anenxure:3).

10. Not only this the photographs, taken at the time of receiving of Stridhan are also attached as Annexure: 4).

11.That as per Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, as defined herein, “Giving dowry and abetment to the giving of dowry is a criminal offence”. Moreover neither the applicant nor any of his family members ever demanded any dowry in this marriage but Sh. Chittaranjan Dev Goel and Mrs. Shakuntala Goel gave dowry of their own in their daughter Ashima’s marriage and Ashima and her brother Alok Goel never stopped their parents Smt. & Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel, from giving dowry as such abetted to the giving of dowry in the marriage.

See also  498A acquited - Failed prove suicide as Dowry death

12. That the Dowry Prohibition Act prescribes stringent punishment of five years imprisonment and fine equivalent to the amount of dowry to a person, who gives or takes or abets to the giving or taking of Dowry under section 3 of the DP Act 1961 to curb this social evil.

13. That Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel and his daughter had admitted this fact of giving Dowry in the marriage in complaints before the Women Cell, Karnal and in FIR No: 962/2014 PS: Janakpuri roping in the entire family of the complainant with vested interest, hence are liable for punishment under section 3 of the dowry prohibition act.

14. That the police should also refer the investigations in regard to the known sources of Income of Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel to the Income Tax Deptt. to verify if Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel can afford to spend approximately Rs. 45 Lacs in his daughter Ashima’s marriage as claimed by Ms. Ashima in her statement before the Investigating Officer as well as by Mr Chittaranjan Dev Goel in his complaint at Women Cell, Karnal, as is held in the case of Neera Singh Vs State and Another by Hon’ble Delhi High Courts, “that the police should also investigate into the known sources of income of the complainant and her family members who claims to have given exaggerated quantum of Jewellery and claims to have spent huge amounts in marriage, while dealing with Dowry Harassment case.” It is one such case where the girl’s father being a simple Clerk with an advocate, claims to have spent about Rs. 45 Lakhs in his daughter’s marriage and other ceremonies as mentioned in the FIR which need special attention of the Law Enforcing Agencies to bring the truth on record.

See also  Can court reject application for amendment of plaint on ground that its under recording of evidence?

15. That the persons who admitted of giving dowry without any demand are liable to be prosecuted under the Law of the Land and the persons who did not object to the giving of Dowry by the parents of Ashima are liable to be prosecuted for abetment to the giving of Dowry as well. Accordingly a case may be registered against all these persons taking cognizance for the giving of dowry and for abetment to the giving of dowry.

16. That the marriage was solemnized at New Delhi, where the false case / FIR against the applicant and his entire family at PS: Janakpuri, Delhi has been registered, where the Dowry is alleged to have been given. Hence the cause of action arose under the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.

17. Hence Smt. & Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel and Ms. Ashima and her brother Alok Goel are liable for giving dowry and abetment to the giving of dowry and accordingly cognizance may be taken by registering a case against all the accused persons as is held by Hon’ble Justice S.N. Dhingra of the Delhi High Court in famous case Titled as Mrs. Neera Singh vs state & others in Criminal M.C.: 7262/2006; “That the Police should simultaneously register a case against the parents of the Complainant as well, U/S: 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, who marry their well educated daughters by giving dowry without any demand.

HENCE THIS APPLICATION.ÿPRAYER: IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AS MENTIONED ABOVE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, IT IS MOST HUMBLY PRAYED THAT COGNIZANCE MAY BE TAKEN AGAINST ALL THE ACCUSED PERSONS FOR GIVING DOWRY OF THEIR OWN, WITHOUT ANY DEMAND AND ALSO FOR ABETMENT TO THE GIVING OF DOWRY U/S: 3 OF THE DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT. PRAYED ACCORDINGLY

SD
ENGLISH

Rajender Gupta Applicant
Place: Delhi Dated: 27/09/2014
Through Counsel A K Padhy PADHY & CO. (Solicitors)
Office: I-37, Sector-41.
NOIDA. Mobile: +9199299978, +919654819454, +919911512400
E. Mail: padhynco@gmail.com.
DO/PS Janakpuri to register a case u/s 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act and investigation be handed over to SI Umesh Yadav.

SD

Leave a Reply

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

CopyRight @ 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 read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Section 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

See also  Anticipatory bail in 498A after process of Sec.82 of Cr.P.C
MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation