Implicating relatives in crimes pertaining to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths based on omnibus allegations without specific instances of their involvement in the crime should be avoided to prevent the abuse of the process of law.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

2. This petition has been filed for quashing the cognizance order dated 13.02.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribag whereby cognizance has been taken against the petitioners and summon has been issued against the petitioners as well as for quashing entire criminal proceeding in connection with Complaint Case No.905/2016, so far as these petitioners are concerned.

3. The complaint case was filed by opposite party no.2 alleging therein that she is the married wife of accused no.1 Anil Kumar Singh and the marriage was solemnized on 21.04.2014. At the time of marriage, Rs.6,50,000/- was given to the accused persons in dowry. It was further alleged that after marriage the complainant came to her Sasural where she noticed peculiar behaviour including her Jetthani, Nanad and husband. It was also alleged that on the first night of the marriage, the Jethani of the complainant told the husband of the complainant to tell the complainant all the facts and thereafter her husband told the complainant to bring at least Rs.10,00,000/-from her Naihar else he will leave her. It was further alleged that after some days, the accused persons made a fun that she is not a lady and these two petitioners told either to kill the complainant or to abandon her. On 25.04.2014, the complainant came back to her Naihar along with her father but at that time also the accused persons demanded Rs.10,00,000/-. It was also alleged that on 12.08.2014, the complainant returned to her Sasural but soon thereafter the accused persons started torturing her and thereafter she was examined by the doctor and the doctor found her a fit lady, she was also examined at Ranchi. It was further alleged that in the meantime, she became pregnant and then her husband along with Preety Devi and petitioner no.2 Pratima Devi administered poison to her due to which she became ill. It was further alleged that the husband of the complainant has illicit relationship with his Bhabhi.

4. Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that only omnibus allegations are there against these two petitioners, who are sister-in-law and brother-in-law of opposite party no.2 and they are residing in a separate house. He further submits that before 12.03.2016, petitioner no.2 was posted in Kasturwa Gandhi Balika Vidyalay, Markacho and the complaint has been filed in the year 2016. He further submits that in the solemn affirmation, opposite party no.2 has not taken name of these two petitioners. He draws attention of the Court to the order taking cognizance dated 13.02.2017 and submits that in last paragraph of that order, the learned court has observed that there is only a general allegation of physical torture and thereafter the learned court has not proceeded to take cognizance under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code. On these grounds, he submits that entire criminal proceeding may be quashed, so far as these petitioners are concerned.

5. Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submits that there are allegations against the petitioners and the learned Court has taken cognizance against the petitioners looking into the entire complaint case. He further submits that there is no illegality in the impugned order. He also submits that the trial is going on.

6. Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the State tried to justify the cognizance order by way of submitting that reasoned order is there.

7. In light of the above submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court has gone through the material on record and finds that so far as physical torture is concerned, there are omnibus allegations against all the accused and considering this fact, the learned court has not taken cognizance so far as physical torture is concerned under re