A second revision petition is not maintainable under Section 397(3) of the Cr.P.C.; mere allegations without sufficient evidence do not justify charges under IPC Sections 406 and 498A.

JUDGMENT

Amit Sharma J. The present petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, seeks setting aside of the impugned order dated 10.05.2013, passed by Sh. Vinay Kumar Khanna, learned Additional Sessions Judge-04, South-East District, Saket Courts, Delhi in Criminal Revision No. 09 of 2013, titled Ritu Sethi Vs. State & Ors., dismissing the said revision petition. Vide the said revision petition, the petitioner had sought setting aside of order on charge, dated 10.03.2013, passed by the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, South-East District, Saket Courts, Delhi; in case FIR No.36/2003 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, Police Station: Greater Kailash-I, whereby the husband/respondent no. 3 was charged under Section 498-A IPC, whereas other accused persons namely Mrs. Suniti Sethi/mother-in-law and Ms. Mala Sethi/sister-in-law/respondent no. 2 were discharged for the offences under Sections 498A/406 IPC and the husband/respondent no. 3 was discharged for the offence under Section 406 IPC.

2. Brief factual background necessary for the disposal of the present petition is as under:

i. Ms. Ritu Sethi (the petitioner) and Mr. Vivek Sethi (respondent no. 3) got married on 10.12.2001, in accordance with Hindu Rites and Ceremonies.

ii. The petitioner filed a complaint dated 05.08.2002 at CWC Cell, Nanakpura, culminating into registration of FIR bearing No. 36/2003, under Section 498A/406/34 of the IPC at P.S. Greater Kailash-I on 27.02.2003.

iii. Upon conclusion of the investigation, a chargesheet was filed before the Court of Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, who took cognizance of the same on 18.10.2003. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate vide order dated 10.01.2013, framed charges against the Mr. Vivek Sethi/respondent no. 3 under Section 498A of the IPC, while discharging the Mother-in-law & Sister-in-law of the petitioner, under Section 498A & 406 of the IPC. Vide the aforesaid order, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate also discharged Mr. Vivek Sethi/respondent no. 3 for offence under Section 406 of the IPC.

iv. The petitioner preferred a revision petition bearing no. 09/2013 against the aforesaid order on charge dated 10.01.2013, whereby, the petitioner sought setting aside of the order discharging the mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the petitioner and the discharge of her husband, Mr. Vivek Sethi/respondent no. 3 under Section 406 of the IPC. The said revision petition was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 10.05.2013.

v. The aforesaid order dated 10.05.2013 was challenged by the petitioner before this Court vide CRL.M.C.4449/2014 (being disposed of by the present judgment).

vi. During the pendency of the revision petition bearing no. 09/2013, the mother-in-law of the petitioner, i.e., Smt. Suniti Sethi passed away.

vii. In the meantime, the trial qua the husband/Mr. Vivek Sethi for offence punishable under section 498A of the IPC continued and vide order dated 17.09.2016, Mr. Vivek Sethi, was acquitted for offence punishable under Section 498A IPC by Ms. Charu Gupta, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court, SED/Saket Courts, New Delhi. The said judgment of acquittal was challenged by the petitioner in CRL.A. 29/2016, before the learned District and Sessions Judge, South-East, Saket Courts, New Delhi. The said criminal appeal was dismissed vide order dated 21.02.2018 by Sh. Girish Kathpalia, District & Sessions Judge, South-East, Saket Courts, New Delhi. Aggrieved with the aforesaid judgment dated 20.01.2018, the petitioner preferred criminal revision petition being CRL.REV.P.471