SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 5778

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Amit Sharma, J.
Ram Sahay Meena Kalky & Anr. - Appellants
Versus
State & Anr. - Respondents
Crl. M.C. 4304, 5055, 5066 and 5072 of 2014; Crl. M.A. 14880, 17345, 17306 and 17360 of 2014; Crl. M.A. 20773, 20162 and 20224 of 2022
Decided On : 16-11-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. S.P. Singh, Advocate, Mr. Ajit Kumar Ekka, Advocate, Mr. Abhishek Chauhan, Advocate and Mr. Ajit Kumar, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for the State with SI Vijaypal Singh, P.S. C.W.C. Nanak Pura, Mr. Navin Sharma, Advocate for Respondent-2.

IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the scope of challenging two concurrent findings under Section 482 of the CrPC is limited, and the petitioners failed to demonstrate any illegality in the orders that would warrant interference by the High Court.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code - Setting aside of orders - Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC

Fact of the Case:

The case involved petitions seeking to set aside orders passed by the learned Additional Session Judge and the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, which framed charges against the petitioners under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC in a case filed by the complainant, Smt. Sheela Meena, against her husband and in-laws for harassment and demand of dowry.

Finding of the Court:

The learned ASJ and the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, after analyzing the material on record, framed charges against the petitioners under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC. The revision petitions filed by the petitioners were dismissed by the learned ASJ, who upheld the findings of the lower court.

Issues: The main issue was whether the charges framed against the petitioners under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC were sustainable based on the allegations made by the complainant.

Ratio Decidendi: The courts held that the charges were sustainable as the allegations made by the complainant were specific and warranted the framing of charges against the petitioners. The courts also emphasized that the scope of challenging two concurrent findings under Section 482 of the CrPC is limited and that the petitioners failed to demonstrate any illegality in the orders that would warrant interference by the High Court.

Final Decision: The High Court found no reason to interfere with the orders passed by the lower courts and dismissed the petitions.

JUDGMENT

Amit Sharma, J. - The present petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('CrPC') seek setting aside of separate impugned orders of the same date 31.05.2014, passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi, whereby revision petitions filed on behalf of the petitioners herein, were dismissed. Vide aforesaid revision petitions, the petitioners had sought setting aside of order dated 26.10.2013, passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate-01, Mahila Court, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi, in case FIR No. 33/2009, registered at P.S. CWC, Nanakpura, whereby charges were framed qua Mohan Lal Meena under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC') and qua other accused persons namely, Ram Sahay Meena Kalky, Rajeshwari Meena, Jagan Lal Meena and Ram Nari Meena under Sections 498A/34 of the IPC.

2. It is noted that by separate judgments of the same date, learned ASJ has disposed of revision petitions filed on behalf of the petitioners herein, in relation to same FIR registered at the instance of respondent no. 2. The facts and circumstances of the aforesaid revision petitions were similar and hence challenge to the impugned orders is being disposed of by a common judgment, since similar contentions have been raised by the petitioners herein. Details of the petitions before this Court are as under:

    i. CRL.MC. 5055/2014 filed on behalf of Mohan Lal Meena, husband of the complainant assails the order dated 31.05.2014 passed by the learned ASJ in CR no. 26/2014, whereby the learned ASJ has dismissed a revision petition against an order dated 26.10.2013 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate framing charges against the said petitioner for offences under Sections 498A/34 and 406 of the IPC.

    ii. CRL.MC. 4304/2014 filed on behalf of Ram Sahay Meena Kalky and Rajeshwari Meena, brother-in-law and sister-in-law of the complainant, assails the order dated 31.05.2014 passed by the learned ASJ in CR no. 07/2014, whereby the learned ASJ has dismissed a revision petition against an order dated 26.10.2013 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate framing charges against the said petitioners for offences under Sections 498A/34 of the IPC.

    iii. CRL.MC. 5066/2014 filed on behalf of Jagan Lal Meena, brother-inlaw of the complainant assails the order dated 31.05.2014 passed by the learned ASJ in CR no. 23/2014, whereby the learned ASJ has dismissed a revision petition against an order dated 26.10.2013 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate framing charges against the said petitioner for offences under Sections 498A/34 IPC.

    iv. CRL.MC. 5072/2014 filed on behalf of Ram Nari Meena, sister-in-law of the complainant assails the order dated 31.05.2014 passed by the learned ASJ in CR no. 22/2014, whereby the learned ASJ has dismissed a revision petition against an order dated 26.10.2013 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate framing charges against the said petitioner for offences under Sections 498A/34 IPC.

    3. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are as under:

      i. Smt. Sheela Meena (respondent no. 2/complainant) and Sh. Mohan Lal Meena (petitioner in CRL. MC 5055/2014) got married on 15.05.2002, in accordance with Hindu rites and ceremonies and two children were born out of the said wedlock.

      ii. Respondent no. 2 lodged a complaint dated 23.02.2009 at the Crimes Against Women Cell ('CAWC') against the petitioners being Complaint no. 6-S/West (CWC) Nanak Pura, New Delhi. Subsequently, an FIR dated 27.09.2009, bearing No. 33/2009, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC registered at P.S. CWC/Nanakpura qua her husband and in-laws.

      iii. Upon conclusion of investigation in the aforesaid FIR, the investigating officer filed chargesheet against five accused persons namely, Mohan Lal Meena (husband), Ram Sahay Meena Kalky (brother-in-law), Jagan Lal Meena (brother-in-law), Rajeshwari Meena (sister-in-law) and Ram Nari Meena (sister-in-law) under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC. Sin

                                Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                                1
                                2
                                3
                                4
                                5
                                6
                                7
                                8
                                9
                                10
                                11
                                SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                                supreme today icon
                                logo-black

                                An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                                Please visit our Training & Support
                                Center or Contact Us for assistance

                                qr

                                Scan Me!

                                India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                                For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                                whatsapp-icon Back to top