Judgment:
MCr.C.No.6105 o”
6. 03.13 Shri Vijay Kumr Pandey, counsel for the applicants.
Shri Rohini Prasad Tiwari, GA for the respondent/State.
The applicants/ accused have filed this petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C for quashment of the FIR registered as crime No.969/07 at P.S Pali district Umaria against them for the offence of section 498-A/34 of the IPC along with the prayer for quashment of the entire investigation process of this FIR so also the charge sheet filed before the competent court having the territorial jurisdiction to prosecute the applicants with respect of the alleged offence.
Applicants counsel after taking me through the papers placed on the record including the copy of the FIR said that the same was lodged at very belated stage after 14 days from the date of incident so also by fabricating the false story the applicants have been implicated in the matter.
In continuation, he also said that the charge sheet has not been filed in accordance with the procedure prescribed under section 173 of the Cr.P.C and prayed for admission and allowing this petition.
State counsel submits that he is not under receipt of the case diary.
Keeping in view the arguments advanced by the counsel, I have carefully gone through the FIR which was registered on the basis of some report in writing at PS.
Gohalpur, Jabalpur on dated 24.7.07.
According to such report the wife of applicant No.1, namely, Indu alias Chandrakanta w/o Vijendra Pandey has given such report in writing contending that she got married in accordance with the Hindu rites and rituals with applicant No.1 on dated 5.6.02.
At the time of marriage her father had given the dowry of Rs.5,01,000/- in cash and also the ornaments and other articles having worth of Rs.50,000/-.
Besides this some other articles were also given.
Inspite that the demand of her husband and his family was continued for Rs.1,00,000/- and one motorcycle.
It is also stated that subsequent to the marriage only after 7-8 days after taking her ornaments she was subjected to beating by the applicants and also was subjected to demand of dowry of Rs.1 lac and motorcycle.
It is further stated that before 20 days from the date of giving the report some hot liquid substance was thrown on her legs while she was sleeping and was also subjected to beating by her husband on dated 22.7.07 and on such report the FIR was initially registered at the aforesaid Police station from where the same was sent to P.S.Pali in whose territorial jurisdiction the alleged incident was happened, on which, again the original offence was registered as crime number 969/07 against the applicants for the offence of section 498-A/34 of the IPC.
True it is that in the FIR, the incident of 10.7.07 is mentioned and the same was not reported for 14 days and such incident was also reported along with the incident of dated 22.7.07 on 24.7.07.
So, in the aforesaid premises, at this stage, it could not be said that the FIR was lodged at very belated stage.
Such question could be considered only after recording the evidence and on its appreciation and not prior to that.
It is settled proposition so also the provision of law that whenever any SHO of the Police Station is under receipt of the report regarding cognizable offence then he has no option except to register the offence and subject to provision of the Cr.P.C he has right to investigate the matter.
On going through the FIR, I have found the prima facie ingredients of the offence of section 498-A of the IPC and section 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the applicants.
So, in such premises at this stage when particulars of the alleged act of the applicants have been stated in the FIR and on that basis the investigation was carried-out and the applicants have been charge sheeted for the alleged offence so, at this stage, it could not be said that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the matter by making the false story.
As such aforesaid both the questions, lodging the FIR at belated stage as well as the concocting false story by the complainant against the applicants may be the good defence for the applicants in the trial but on that basis by invoking the inherent powers of this court enumerated under section 482 of the Cr.P.C, the impugned criminal case could not be quashed.
Consequently, this petition being devoid of any merits, deserves to be and is hereby dismissed at the stage of motion hearing.
(U.C.Maheshwari) Judge MKL