Suraj Vs. State and anr - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
sb criminal misc. petition no.1884/2012 suraj. vs. state of rajasthan & anr. (1) in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur. ::: judgment ::: s.b. criminal misc. petition no.1884/2012 suraj. vs. state of raj. & anr. date of judgment ::1. t august, 2012. hon'ble mr. justice sandeep mehta mr.jitendra ojha, for the petitioner. mr.kk rawal, pp, for the respondent state. ... by the court : heard learned counsel for the parties. the instant misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking quashing of f.i.r. no.264/2012 registered against him at p.s. sangaria, district hanumangarh, for the offences under sections 498a, 406 and 420 ipc, at the instance of the respondent no.2. learned counsel for the petitioner contends that earlier on, the complainant had filed another report against the petitioner and other accused persons being fir no.50/2011 registered at p.s. sangaria. the police filed a charge-sheet in the said fir and the petitioner is facing trial for the same charges. therefore, he submits that thereafter the impugned fir has been filed against the petitioner sb criminal misc. petition no.1884/2012 suraj. vs. state of rajasthan & anr. (2) which is nothing but a second fir and as such, the same deserves to be quashed. a perusal of the facts of the case reveals that during the course of pendency of the proceedings of the earlier fir, the parties arrived at a compromise and the complainant agreed to live with her husband at her marital home. she went back to her marital home and conceived. thereafter, she has specifically alleged that she has again been harassed and turned out of the house after beating being given to her even when she was carrying a child in her womb. the specific allegation is that she was beaten and then turned out of the house on 22.7.2011 on the ground of bringing less dowry. after that also, she gave birth to a female child on 22.11.2011 and intimation was given to the accused but the accused stuck to their demand of dowry for a sum of rs.50,000/-. in this view of the matter, the present fir cannot be said to be a second fir on same facts so as to interfere in the same by exercising powers under section 482 cr.p.c. resultantly, the instant misc. petition having no force, is hereby dismissed. stay petition also stands dismissed. (sandeep mehta), j.s.phophaliya

Judgment:
SB Criminal Misc. Petition No.1884/2012 Suraj. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. ::: JUDGMENT ::: S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1884/2012 Suraj. vs. State of Raj. & Anr. Date of Judgment ::

1. t August, 2012. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA Mr.Jitendra Ojha, for the petitioner. Mr.KK Rawal, PP, for the respondent State. ... BY THE COURT : Heard learned counsel for the parties. The instant misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking quashing of F.I.R. No.264/2012 registered against him at P.S. Sangaria, District Hanumangarh, for the offences under Sections 498A, 406 and 420 IPC, at the instance of the respondent no.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that earlier on, the complainant had filed another report against the petitioner and other accused persons being FIR No.50/2011 registered at P.S. Sangaria. The police filed a charge-sheet in the said FIR and the petitioner is facing trial for the same charges. Therefore, he submits that thereafter the impugned FIR has been filed against the petitioner SB Criminal Misc. Petition No.1884/2012 Suraj. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (2) which is nothing but a second FIR and as such, the same deserves to be quashed. A perusal of the facts of the case reveals that during the course of pendency of the proceedings of the earlier FIR, the parties arrived at a compromise and the complainant agreed to live with her husband at her marital home. She went back to her marital home and conceived. Thereafter, she has specifically alleged that she has again been harassed and turned out of the house after beating being given to her even when she was carrying a child in her womb. The specific allegation is that she was beaten and then turned out of the house on 22.7.2011 on the ground of bringing less dowry. After that also, she gave birth to a female child on 22.11.2011 and intimation was given to the accused but the accused stuck to their demand of dowry for a sum of Rs.50,000/-. In this view of the matter, the present FIR cannot be said to be a second FIR on same facts so as to interfere in the same by exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Resultantly, the instant misc. petition having no force, is hereby dismissed. Stay petition also stands dismissed. (SANDEEP MEHTA), J.

S.Phophaliya