JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned Advocate General, Assam, assisted by Mr. B. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P.N. Choudhury, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Chandan, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 as well as Ms. M. Kechi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Nagaland/respondent no.1.

2. The petitioner no. 1 is the wife of the respondent no. 2 and petitioner no. 2 to petitioner no. 7 are the relatives of petitioner no. 1. The petitioners have filed an application u/s 482 of Cr.P.C., 1973 seeking quashment of the FIR dated 12/10/2021 registered as Sub Urban police station case no. 79/2021 u/s 420/384/389/506/34 IPC at Dimapur, Nagaland.

3. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner no. 1 became acquainted with the respondent no. 2 sometime in the year 2012 in a common coaching class. Subsequently they became friends and started meeting more often. In January 2019, the respondent no. 2 confessed his feelings for the petitioner no. 1 which she out rightly denied at that time. Thereafter, despite the reluctance from the petitioner no.1, the respondent no. 2 constantly pursued the petitioner no. 1 for about 4/ 5 months until she agreed to his proposal in May, 2019.

4. The families of the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 2 first met on 26.01.2020 at Delhi. They assured the parents of the petitioner no. 1 that they would treat her as their own daughter. Subsequently, in the month of February, 2020 the parents of petitioner no. 1 along with petitioner no. 1 and her brother, petitioner no. 3 visited Dimapur, Nagaland, the native place of respondent no. 2 at his request. They stayed there for two nights only. Having believed everything that was displayed before them by the respondent no. 2, the parents of the petitioner no. 1 had agreed to solemnize the marriage between the petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 and accordingly their marriage was held on 27/11/2020. After marriage the petitioner no. 1 resided at her matrimonial home at Delhi with the parents of respondent no. 2, sister-in-law and their husbands. On the very first day of her marriage, all of her jewellery (including Stridhan) valuable articles, important documents (such as passport etc) given to her at the time of marriage were taken away by her in laws. Thereafter, the petitioner no. 1 along with respondent no. 2 also visited the parental home of the respondent no. 2 at Dimapur, Nagaland and stayed there for couple of months after marriage.

5. It is alleged by the petitioners in the petition that immediately after the solemnization of marriage, the petitioner no. 1 was subjected to torture, cruelty, harassment and humiliation both physically and mentally at the hands of respondent no. 2 and his family members for not bringing substantial wealth to the family of her in-laws. The petitioner no. 1 after enduring verbal and physical abuse for about 6 months, was constrained to leave the house of respondent no. 2 on 16.05.2021 within a short span of six months and took shelter at her parental home at New Delhi. Subsequently, the petitioner no. 1 had lodged an FIR against the respondent no. 2 and his family members on 10.09.2021 alleging physical and mental torture hurled towards her by the respondent no. 2 and his family members before the ACP Crime Against Women Cell, South District, New Delhi. On the basis of the said FIR, a case was registered vide South Delhi GK PS Case no. 321/2021 u/s 120 B/406/420/354/498A/509 IPC and section 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

6. Later on, to settle the matter amicably some meetings were held between the parties, with the consent of both the parties and their family members so as to return the jewelleries, articles and stridhan properties of petitioner no. 1. The meetings were held by the family members of both petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 but the settlement could not be materialized but subsequently the jewellery, articles and stridhan properties were