SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Suresh Kumar Ahirwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 February, 2018

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC-10153-2017
(SURESH KUMAR AHIRWAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

7
Jabalpur, Dated : 19-02-2018
Mr. Anil Khare, learned senior counsel along with Mr. J.S.
Hora, advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Mohit Naik, learned Government Advocate for the
respondent No.1/State.

sh
Mr. A.P. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

e
Heard.

ad
The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the

Pr
Cr.P.C. for invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court and to
quash the FIR registered at Crime No.193/2017 at police station –

a
hy

Kolar Road, Bhopal for offences punishable under Section 498-A read
with Section 34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry
ad

Prohibition Act.

M

2. Bereft of the unnecessary details, the facts requisite for
disposal of this case are that the marriage of the respondent No.2 –

of

Priya Ahirwar was solemnised with the petitioner No.1 Suresh on
rt

13.05.2014 at Sagar. Petitioner No.2 and 3 are mother-in-law and
ou

father-in-law of the complainant. Petitioner No.4 is brother-in-law and
the petitioner No.5 is the sister-in-law (wife of the petitioner No.4) of
C

the complainant.

h

3. The respondent No.2 lodged a FIR on 31.03.2017 at
ig

police station – Kolar Road, Bhopal alleging that at the time of
H

marriage and after the engagement ceremony, the accused persons –
petitioner No.s 1 to 3 have levied a condition for fixing the date of
marriage that Rs.10 Lacs was demanded for purchase of a Scorpio
vehicle, be given at the time of marriage. The parents of the
complainant, became perplexed and somehow arranged the amount of
Rs.10 Lacs and handed over to the accused persons. Two months after
the marriage, the petitioners 1, 2,3 and 5 started “taunting” her for
bringing less dowry and told her that with this less dowry, demand of
family members could not be fulfilled. She told them that her father
has given whatever he could and he is not financially sound to fulfill
the demands. But the complainant was repeatedly harassed mentally
and physically.

4. Her husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law (petitioner
No.5) constantly harassing her and assaulted her. She narrated the
incident to her parents. They somehow kept calm and assured her that
after some days, everything will be normalised. Later, she started
living with her husband at Satna where her husband was working in
the forest department. There also the accused husband used to assault
the complainant. He told the complainant that all his batch-mates

sh
have purchased houses. He wants to purchase a house at Bhopal and

e
for that purpose he asked the complainant to tell her father to make

ad
down payment of Rs.18 Lacs otherwise she will not be kept in her

Pr
marital home. On 15.12.2015 when her husband went to Bhopal for
some official work, she also accompanied him. On the way, she was
a
subject to abuses and assault. She stayed at Bhopal in Room No.204
hy

of Hotel- Reva. At about 11 p.m. again the accused husband made the
ad

demand of purchase of house and abused her and assaulted her. When
M

she narrated the incident to her father, her father came to the hotel and
took her along with him to her parental home. Subsequently, her
of

husband also came to her parental house and stayed there for three
days. During this period also he assaulted her.

rt

5. After one month, the petitioner No.1 came to Bhopal and
ou

with the assurance that she will not be ill-treated, she was taken back
C

to the matrimonial home. After reaching matrimonial home, she was
h

again treated with cruelty. Her in-laws assaulted her. She informed
ig

the same to her parents and relatives. She also lodged a complaint
H

before State Woman Commission at Bhopal. She was threatened by
the petitioner No.1 and the accused persons stating that if the demand
is fulfilled then only she will live happily, otherwise, she would be
thrown away from the matrimonial home. She came back to her
parental house because of the mental and physical cruelty subjected by
the petitioners.

6. On behalf of the petitioners, detailed arguments
advanced. It is contended that the petitioners have been falsely
implicated. FIR has been lodged without due adherence to settled
principles of law. FIR contains the names of all the members of the
family which is counter blast of the divorce proceeding initiated by the
petitioner No.1 to wreak vengeance. The petitioners 2 to 5 are living at
Tikamgarh whereas the complainant was living at Satna along with the
petitioner No.1. Therefore, the petitioners 2 to 5 had hardly any
occasion to live with the complainant. Therefore, no such physical
and mental harassment for dowry was caused to the complainant by
the petitioners 2 to 5. It is also claimed that the petitioner No.1 tried
to pacify the matter and to save his marriage by approaching Family
Counselling Centre, Satna in December, 2017 but all his efforts went

sh
into vein. The complainant along with her family matters had gone to

e
the extreme level, assaulted the petitioner No.1 and made him to run

ad
for his life. He was constrained to file an application for dissolution of

Pr
marriage. Bald and baseless allegations have been made against the
family members. Therefore, Crime No.193/2017 be quashed.

a

7. On behalf of the respondent State, this petition has been
hy

opposed stating that in the statements of the witnesses including the
ad

complaint, every detail has been given and prima facie the petitioners
M

are responsible for demand of dowry and harassment to the
complainant.

of

8. On behalf of the respondent No.2, it is argued that much
earlier to filing of the application for divorce. The relationship
rt

between the complainant and the petitioner No.1 were strained. There
ou

was demand of dowry right from the beginning. Therefore, it cannot
C

be said that after filing of divorce petition, the respondent No.2
h

complainant lodged the FIR. The documents which have been
ig

referred to by the petitioners themselves show that there has been
H

strained relationship between husband and wife. The application for
divorce was filed much later. Prior to the same, saveral complainants
were made to the police and Superintendent of Police. Therefore, the
present petition deserves to be dismissed.

9. Perused the record. There are specific allegations against
the husband petitioner No.1, petitioner No.2-mother-in-law Savitri
Bai; petitioner No.3-father-in-law and petitioner No.5- Babli Ahirwar
for demand of dowry. Much of the grievance of the complainant in the
FIR and subsequent complaints is against the petitioners numbers 1 to
3 and 5. However, against the petitioner No.4 no specific averment has
been made and only omnibus allegations have been made. So far as
divorce petition is concerned, it was filed on 10.02.2017 under Section
13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. FIR has been lodged on 31.03.2017.
Appearance of the complainant was marked on 06.04.2017 before ASJ
whereas the FIR was lodged on 31.03.2017. Otherwise also the
complainant made complaint to the police station on 13.05.2016 and
before the Parivar Paramarsh Kendra. As regarding the report at
Mahila Thana (Exhibit P-7), no opinion can be given at this stage.

10. At this stage, it would not be appropriate to make a

sh
roving enquiry. This Court in exercise of power under section 482 of

e
the Code of Criminal Procedure is not supposed to œembark upon an

ad
enquiry whether the allegations in FIR and the charge-sheet are

Pr
reliable or not, thereupon to render definite finding about truthfulness
or veracity of the allegations. These are matters which can be
a
examined only by the Court concerned after the entire material is
hy

produced before it on a thorough investigation and evidence is led.

ad

Similarly it is not proper to analyse the case of the prosecution story in
M

the light of all probabilities in order to determine whether conviction
would be sustainable and on such premises to arrive at a conclusion
of

that the charges have to be quashed. Whether the case is beyond
reasonable doubt, is not to be seen at this stage. At this stage, the
rt

Court is required to evaluate the material and documents on record
ou

with a view to find out if the facts emerging therefrom are taken at
C

their face value, disclose existence of all the ingredients constituting
h

the alleged offence.

ig

11. As regarding the petitioner No.4 – Mahendra Ahirwar
H

there is no specific allegations or role attributed to him. Accordingly,
this petition is allowed in respect of the petitioner No.4. Reference in
this regard can be made to the decision in the case of Dashrath P.
Bundela and Others v. State of MP and Another, 2012 (1) MPHT

196.

12. Resultantly, this petition is allowed in part. FIR bearing
Crime No.193/2017 dated 31.03.2017 registered at police station –
Kolar Road, district- Bhopal is quashed in respect of the petitioner
No.4 – Mahendra Ahirwar. It is made clear that proceeding against the
other accused persons shall continue as it is.

Digitally signed by
KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN
SHUKLA
Date: 2018.02.24 15:45:24 +05’30’
SUSHIL KUMAR PALO)
JUDGE

ks

e sh
ad
Pr
a
hy
ad
M
of
rt
ou
C
h
ig
H

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