SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Lutfur Alom vs Arjuwara Begum And Anr on 19 February, 2019

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010175592018

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : Crl.Pet. 776/2018

1:LUTFUR ALOM
S/O TAHER ALI
R/O VILL- WARD NO. 2, MANGALDOI
P.S. MANGALDOI
DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM

VERSUS

1:ARJUWARA BEGUM AND ANR.
W/O MD. LUTFUR ALOM
D/O MD. ACHIRUDDIN AHMED
R/O WARD NO. 2,
MANGALDOI
P.S. MANGALDOI,
DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY PP
ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B CHOWDHURY

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM (R2)

BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

ORDER

19.02.2019
Heard Mr. B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also

heard Mr. B. B. Gogoi, learned Addl. P.P., Assam, appearing for the State and
Page No.# 2/3

Mr. N. Ahmed, learned counsel representing the respondent No.1.

In this petition a prayer has been made for quashing the complaint case

registered as Criminal Case No.160/2018 in the Court of learned SDJM,

Mangaldoi and the order dated 11.06.2018 passed therein taking cognizance

of the complaint made against the petitioner/accused under Section 406 of the

IPC.

By referring to the materials available on record Mr. Choudhury submits

that there is no allegation regarding entrustment of the property to the

petitioner and as such the learned court below ought not to have taken

cognizance of the complaint case under Section 406 IPC. Instead, submits Mr.

Choudhury, the allegations made in the complaint would at best make out a

case under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. As such, a

prayer has been made for quashing the aforesaid proceeding.

Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondent No.1, on the other hand,

submits that in this case the complainant is merely seeking to prosecute the

petitioner for misappropriation of the ‘stridhan” articles which are lying in his

custody. The learned trial Court had taken cognizance of the complaint based

on the statements of the witnesses and thereafter, issued process being satisfied

with the materials on record. Therefore, according to Mr. Ahmed, there is no

valid ground for quashing the complaint case at this stage. Mr. Ahmed further

submits that charge-sheet has already been submitted in connection with G.R.

Case No.3564/2017 registered under Section 498A/34 IPC against the petitioner

as a co-accused based on an ejahar lodged by the respondent No.1.

The respondent No.1/complainant was admittedly residing with her
Page No.# 3/3

husband at her matrimonial home before she had to leave that house under

the circumstances alleged in the petition. It is not in dispute that her stridhan is

lying in the matrimonial home. Therefore, having regard to the allegations

made in the complaint as well as the statements of the witnesses examined

under Section 202 Cr.P.C. I am of the prima facie opinion that there were

sufficient materials for the learned court below to take cognizance in the

matter under Section 406 of the IPC.

Whether there is scope for altering charge in this case based on materials

brought before the Court is another matter and the petitioner would always be

at liberty to raise such a plea before the court below. That apart, since a G.R.

case is also pending where charge-sheet has been submitted against the

petitioner, the learned court below may also have to examine as to whether

the process contemplated under Section 210 Cr.P.C. is required to be resorted

to in this case. Therefore, giving liberty to the petitioner to raise the aforesaid

plea before the learned court below in accordance with law, this revision

petition stands disposed of by rejecting the prayer for quashing the complaint

the case.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 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 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 Sectioin 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…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation