JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. B. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. A.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. In this petition, under Sections 397/401 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner-Smti. Manju Paul, has challenged the legality, propriety and correctness of the order, dated 28.07.2022, so passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Tinsukia, in connection with C.R. Case No. 01c/2020. It is to be noted here that vide impugned order, the learned Court below has taken cognizance of the offence under section 500/120B IPC against the accused Smti. Mausumi Das @ Sumi Das and under section 120B IPC against the accused Smti. Seema Das and issued summon to them to appear before the learned court below and to stand trial under the said sections of law.

3. The factual background, leading to filing of the present petition, is briefly stated as under:-

“The respondent No.1 -Smti. Mousumi Das Paul got married with Shri Bishal Paul, the son of the petitioner on 18.06.2018. On the date of marriage the members of her in-laws house involved quarrel with her family members regarding the quality of her stridhans. And from the first day of her marriage her husband and brother in law Mishu Paul, Father in law Rabi Paul and mother in law Smti. Manju Paul started subjecting her to both physical and mental cruelty so as to coerce her to meet their unlawful demand of dowry. On 30.04.2019, she was assaulted by her husband and ousted her from the matrimonial home and since then she has been residing in her uncle’s house. On 14.07.2019, at about 10 AM she with her uncle and aunt and 10 others of that locality went to her husband’s house and brother-in-law Mishu Paul, Father-in-law Rabi Paul and mother-in-law Smti. Manju Paul started hue and cry and damaged her household articles and asked her to live in a separate room but she protested the same. Thereafter her mother-in-law and brother-in-law have assaulted her and her brother-in-law has outraged her modesty and by touching different parts of her body and later on her uncle and aunts rescued her. She then lodged one FIR with the O/C Tinsukia P.S. and upon the same the O/C Tinsukia P.S. has registered a case being Tinsukia P.S. Case No. 1010/19 under section 498(A)/354(B)/34 IPC read with section 4 of the D.P. Act and after investigation laid charge sheet against the petitioner and her son Mishu Paul to stand trial in the court under section aforesaid sections of law. Upon the said charge sheet the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st class has taken cognizance and issued process to the petitioner and her son to appear before it and to stand trail.

The case of the petitioner is that respondent No.1 has filed a false and fabricated case against her and her family members and she and her son Mishu Paul was arrested by police in the said case and forwarded to jail hazoot and they were in custody for 35 days. The house of the petitioner was under CCTV coverage and police seized the same. And DVR of the CCTV footage was sent to Truth Lab, Kolkata for authentication and then to Truth Lab, Bangaluru for forensic examination and the image of the same show that respondent No.1 caused scratch on her person own self with the help of respondent No.3 and respondent No.1 lied on oath under section 164 Cr.P.C. and there by compelled her and her son to remain behind the bar for a period of 32 days. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed a complaint case being C.R. Case No. 01c of 2020 in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tinsukia against the three respondents, but, the learned court below has taken cognizance against respondent No.1 and 2, vide order dated 08.01.2020, but did not take cognizance against respondent No.2 though he is directly involved in the offence.”

4. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present petition on the grounds that:-

(i) despite availability of sufficient materials under sections 193/195/199/200/500/120B & 34 IPC,