Back
2012 Supreme(Gau) 631
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Iqbal Ahmed Ansari, J.
Vijay Kumar Sharma - Appellants
Vs.
Bulbul Sharma - Respondent
Crl. Rev. No. 475 of 2004
Decided On : 29.05.2012
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Mr. J. Roy, Mr. Barbhuyan, Ms. A. Paul and Mr. R.B. Deka
For Respondents/Defendant: Mr. P.K. Roy Choudhury, Mr. Aslam Khan & Mr. Z. Kamar, PP
Headnote:
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 – Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 498A,405 and 406 – Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Sections 200, 498A, 482, 561A, 156(1), 155(2), 397 - Sought to get set aside and quashed the proceedings - Lodged a complaint - Seeks to get quashed - Hindu rites and customs - Torturing the complainant both mentally as well as physically - Demanding car, flat/house and cash - Marriage of complainant was solemnized with the accused to Hindu rites and customs. On the occasion of the marriage, many articles, gold ornaments and other gifts were given to the complainant - Complainant and the accused lived together as husband and wife till but they remained issueless. In the year - Accused and other inmates of his house started torturing the complainant both mentally as well as physically, demanding car, flat/house and cash. Since acceding to such demands was beyond the capacity of the parental family of the complainant she remained silent - Family members of the accused-petitioner continued with their mental as well as physical torture on the complainant and, one day, the present accused-petitioner threw out the complainant from his house and threatened to kill her if she did not leave - Accused-petitioner and his relatives. However, the accused persons, who had been entrusted with the Stridhan of the complainant, kept all her properties - She was driven out of her matrimonial house. In fact, even the ornaments, which the complainant had been wearing – Held, Minute scrutiny of the contents of the complaint shows that specific assertions have been made by the complainant that she had entrusted her properties with the accused-petitioner. What is, thus, clear from the complaint is that a number of valuable properties had been brought by the complainant from her parental house, on the occasion of her marriage, to her matrimonial house for her exclusive use and were entrusted to her husband. It is also in the evidence of the complainant that she was driven out of her matrimonial house by the accused persons retaining with them the properties, which the complainant had so brought with her - truth or falsity of a complaint is a question for determination at the trial - Though there is no absolute bar for consideration of a document in a proceeding for quashing, the documents, which have been placed on record, in the present case, are those documents, the authorship whereof and the correctness and/or veracity whereof are yet to be established - Revision fails and the same shall stand dismissed
I.A. Ansari, J.
1. With the help of this revision, the accused-petitioner has sought to get set aside and quashed the proceedings of the Complaint Case No. 1390C/2004, wherein an order has been made, on 07.07.2004, by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, No. 2, Kamrup, at Guwahati, taking cognizance of offences under Sections 498A and 406 IPC and directing issuance of summons accordingly to the petitioner and some others and also issuance of search warrant for seizure of the alleged stridhan of the complainant. I have heard Mr. J. Roy, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner, and Mr. Z. Kamar, learned Public Prosecutor, Assam.
2. Before entering into the merit of the present revision, it needs to be pointed out that the opposite party herein lodged a complaint, in writing, which the accused-petitioner seeks to get quashed, the complainant's case being, in brief, thus: The marriage of the complainant was solemnized with the accused, on 28.04.1985, according to Hindu rites and customs. On the occasion of the marriage, many articles, gold ornaments and other gifts were given to the complainant. The complainant and the accused lived together as husband and wife till 2001, but they remained issueless. In the year 2001, the accused and other inmates of his house started torturing the complainant both mentally as well as physically, demanding car, flat/house and cash. Since acceding to such demands was beyond the capacity of the parental family of the complainant, she remained silent. The family members of the accused-petitioner continued with their mental as well as physical torture on the complainant and, one day, the present accused-petitioner threw out the complainant from his house and threatened to kill her if she did not leave Guwahati. As the complainant did not want to end her married life, she tried her best to reach a settlement, but failed. On having failed to live with her husband and relatives, she demanded return of her Stridhan, which had been entrusted to her husband and were under the dominion and enjoyment of the accused-petitioner and his relatives. However, the accused persons, who had been entrusted with the Stridhan of the complainant, kept all her properties (stridhan) with them, when she was driven out of her matrimonial house. In fact, even the ornaments, which the complainant had been wearing, at the time, when she was being driven out, were snatched away by the petitioner. Inspite of repeated requests for refund of Stridhan properties entrusted to the accused persons, as mentioned above, the same have not been returned and, instead, have been misappropriated and converted to the personal use of the accused persons. In fact, the accused persons have been dishonestly disposing of the properties of the complainant.
3. Following the complaint, which was so lodged, and having taken cognizance of offences, under Section 498A and 406 IPC, the learned Court below examined the complainant and her statement was recorded under Section 200 CrPC. In her statement, so recorded, the complainant repeated substantially the allegations, made by her in the complaint, of her having been subjected to cruelty and also stated that despite demands made by her, her Stridhan had not been returned to her by the accused persons, who had been entrusted with the custody of her Stridhan, and the same were being dishonestly misappropriated by the accused-petitioner.
4. Having found that cases of commission of offences under Section 498A and 406 IPC had been made out, the learned Court below directed issuance of summons against the accused persons and also issuance of search warrant for seizure of Stridhan enlisted with the complaint and to give custody thereof to the complainant on her executing a bond of Rs. 20,000/-.
5. Pursuant to the search warrant, so issued, the Stridhan, as demanded by the complainant, have been seized and the custody thereof have already been handed over to her.
6. The accused-petitioner, who is husb
