IMPORTANT POINT
Legality of simultaneous complaint and police investigation for the same offence

JUDGMENT :

Heard the parties.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the order dated 26.05.2022 and all subsequent proceedings of Complaint Case No.239 of 2020 whereby and where under the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Bokaro has held that there is sufficient material in the record for proceeding under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and directed for issuance of summons against the petitioners.

3. The brief fact of the case is that the petitioner No.1 married the complainant/opposite party No.2 on 21.11.2016. At the time of her marriage, the father of the complainant/opposite party No.2 paid cash of Rs.10,00,000/-, Rs.7,50,000/- for jewellery, Rs.50,000/- for clothes and Rs.70,000/- for house-hold articles but being not satisfied with that the petitioners used to treat the complainant/opposite party No.2 with cruelty in connection of demand of further dowry of Rs.20,00,000/- and a car. The complainant/opposite party No.2 has described in detail the acts of cruelty committed by the petitioners. In respect of the occurrence on the written report submitted by the complainant/opposite party No.2, Kadugodi P.S. Case No.09 of 2020 was registered on 13.01.2020 in the district of Bengaluru City in the State of Karnataka. After that three separate occurrences took place on 12.02.2020 when the complainant/opposite party No.2 was not allowed to enter into her matrimonial house because of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. On 15.02.2020 when the complainant/opposite party No.2 went to collect her marriage certificate on the way she was wrongfully restrained by the petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 3 and they criminally intimidated her by threatening to kill her and abused her by using obscene language in public and there is also allegation that on 22.02.2020, the petitioners threatened the complainant/opposite party No.2 to kill her and also threatened her.

4. The learned Magistrate on the basis of the complaint, statement on solemn affirmation and the statement of the enquiry witnesses found sufficient materials in the record for proceeding against the petitioners for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issuance of process itself is bad in law and not in conformity with the settled principle of law. It is next submitted that the petitioners are innocent and the allegations made against them are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioner No.4 who happens to be elder sister-in-law of the complainant/opposite party No.2 resides at separate place with her husband at Noida since February, 2013 and there is no specific allegation against her after institution of the F.I.R.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Babubhai vs. State of Gujarat & Others reported in (2010) 12 SCC 254 paragraph-25 of which reads as under:-

“25. While comparing both the FIRs there is no doubt that both the incidents had occurred at the same place in close proximity of time, therefore, they are two parts of the same transaction. More so, the death of Ajitbhai Prahladbhai has been mentioned in both the FIRs. From the report for deletion of Section 302 IPC, it is apparent that it is not the case of the investigating officer that the death of Ajitbhai Prahladbhai had not occurred during the course of the incident in connection with which CR No. I-154 of 2008 came to be registered.”

and submits that two F.I.Rs’ relating to same incident are not maintainable.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners further relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of T. T. Antony vs. State of Kerala & Others reported in (2001) 6 SCC 181 to buttress his submissions.

8. Learned counse