HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6539/2018
Prakash @ Omprakash S/o Shri Goverdhan B/c Meena, Aged
About 30 Years, R/o Village Udaipura, Bhusavar, Tehsil Kherli,
District Alwar, Raj.
—-Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.
2. Sunita Meena W/o Shri Pradeep B/c Meena, R/o
Bhaisina, Tehsil Bhusawar, District Alwar, At Present
R/o Nithar, Tehsil Bhusawar, District Alwar, Raj.
—-Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Madhu Meena
For the State : Mr. Prakash Thakuriya, P.P.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
/ Order
24/10/2018
Instant petition has been preferred under Section 482
Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of impugned F.I.R. No.273/2017
registered at Police Station Bhusawar District Bharatpur for
offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 341 and
354 I.P.C.
Complainant/respondent No.2 – Sunita Meena on
13.07.2016, as per Hindu Customs Rites was married with
Pradeep Kumar son of Rajaram. The petitioner is a maternal
uncle of Pradeep Kumar, husband of complainant.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has
submitted that the petitioner has involved as many as twenty-
two persons of the family of the husband as accused.
(2 of 2) [CRLMP-6539/2018]
The learned counsel appearing for the complainant/
respondent No.2, has submitted that general, omnibus and
vague allegations have been levelled against all members of the
family.
Counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon
the case of Preeti Gupta and Another Vs. State of Jharkhand and
Another, reported in A.I.R. 2010 Supreme Court 3363, to
contend that the provisions of Sections 406 and 498-A I.P.C.
have been misused and unnecessarily all family members have
been involved in the matrimonial offences, who have nothing to
gain from the alleged demand of dowry.
The learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State,
after going through the impugned F.I.R. has very fairly
submitted that there is no specific allegation against the
petitioner pertaining to offence punishable under Section 354
I.P.c.
Taking into account the submissions made above by
ld. counsel for the petitioner, relationship of the petitioner, who
is maternal uncle of the husband of the complainant, along with
the fact that the complainant has involved twenty-two person as
accused, the present petition is accepted and the impugned
F.I.R., qua the petitioner only is quashed.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J
ashok
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
