JUDGMENT AND ORDER :

C.R. Sarma, J.

By these three criminal petitions, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, Cr.P.C.), the petitioners, who are the accused persons in the concerned complaint cases, as indicated hereinafter, have prayed for quashing the proceedings in C.R. Case No. 475/2014, under Sections 498(A)/34 IPC and C.R. Case No. 463/2014, under Section 406 IPC, and the order, dated 28.02.2014, whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kamrup, Guwahati took cognizance of offence under Section 498(A)/34 IPC, in CR Case No. 475/2014, against the petitioners (in Crl. Petition No. 416/2014 and Criminal Petition No. 464/2014) and the order dated 04.04.2014, whereby cognizance was taken, under Section 406 IPC, in CR Case No. 463 of 2014, against the husband petitioner in Criminal Petition No. 443 of 2014.

2. I have heard Mr. Z. Alam, learned Counsel, appearing for the petitioners and Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned Sr. Counsel, assisted by Ms. R. Jain, learned Counsel, appearing for the respondents.

3. As this set of criminal petitions relate to matrimonial dispute between the same parties, represented by the same set of Counsel, for the sake of convenience and as agreed to by the learned Counsel for the parties, I propose to dispose of the criminal petitions aforesaid by this common order.

4. The Criminal Petition No. 416/2014 has been filed by the husband of the complainant seeking quashment of C.R. Case No. 475/2014 under Section 498/34 IPC, while Criminal Petition No. 464/2014 has been filed by the members of the in-laws of the complainant, seeking quashment of the proceeding in C.R. Case No. 475/2014, under Section 498(A)/34 IPC.

The Criminal Petition 443/2014 has been filed by the husband of the respondent seeking quashment of the proceedings in C.R. Case No. 463/2014, under Section 406 IPC.

5. The private respondent, i.e. the complainant, in the said complaint cases, was married by the accused No. 1 i.e. the petitioner in Criminal Petition No. 464/2014, on 08.12.2001, at Diamond Palace, Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad, in the State of Uttar Pradesh and she used to live in her said matrimonial house at Ghaziabad. As alleged by the complainant, during her stay in the marital home, she was subjected to torture by her said husband and other members of his family in connection with demand of dowry.

6. Out of the said cohabitation, a male child was born to her, on 08.10.2004, but, her husband and other members of his family (all accused persons) demanded her to bring an amount of Rs. 50 Lakhs from her parents and continued with the torture, both mentally and physically. However, she tolerated all such tortures for the sake of her family life and in 2010, a female child was born to her. Being unable to bear with the continued torture, she had to leave her matrimonial home, on 22.04.2012 and took shelter in her parent's house at Guwahati, leaving her minor son with the petitioners.

As alleged by the complainant, on 18.03.2013, the accused persons came to Guwahati for taking the female child and demanded Rs.10 Lakhs from her parents. Though, the complainant, along with her parents, visited her marital home, on 24.04.2013, the accused persons demanded Rs. 10 Lakhs as a condition precedent for accepting her. Having no other alternative, the complainant filed an application at Gaziabad Court, seeking custody of her male child and another suit in the Civil Court at Gaziabad, being Original Suit No. 1114/2013, seeking a decree of divorce.

She has alleged that, during her stay in her parent's house also, the petitioner used to telephonically threaten her demanding money.

7. In view of torture, in connection with demand of dowry and refusal to return her streedhan properties, the complainant, after her return to Guwahati (paternal house) filed Complaint Case No. 475/2014 under Sections 498(A)/406/34 IPC and Complaint Case No. 463/2014, against the petitioners.

The learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Guwahati, by his

Click Here to Read the rest of this document