[2006(2) ADJ 403 (LB)(DB)]
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
(Lucknow Bench)
(Division Bench)
BEFORE : BHANWAR SINGH AND J.M. PALIWAL, JJ.
DHARM RAJ YADAV AND OTHERS ...Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS .....Respondents
(W.P. No. 528(M/B) of 2005, decided on 10th January, 2006)
(B) Constitution of India, 1950—Articles 226 and 227—Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 482—Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution, it can be treated to be as under Article 227 and Section 482, Cr. P.C. for providing immediate relief, available under said Section of Code—That section deals with abuse of process of law—And that High Court would not shy away in exercising its jurisdiction—In interest of justice, to invoke jurisdiction of Court, Court would do so, under its plenary powers irrespective of fact as to whether provisions of Articles 226/227 of Constitution, or of Section 482, Cr. P.C., were invoked—Power of Court, to discharge accused, at stage of framing of charge, or existence of remedy of appeal and revision, was not a bar to invoke jurisdiction of High Court under Article 227 or under Section 482, Cr. P.C. [Paras 21 and 22]
By the Court.—This writ petition has been filed by Sanjeev Kumar Yadav, an Officer of Indian Revenue Service, posted as Assistant Income-tax Commissioner, Moradabad and his eleven family members. All these petitioners have challenged the First Information Report of 11th January, 2005, whereupon a case was registered as Case Crime No. 14 of 2005 under Sections 497/498-A/323/504 and 506 read with 511, I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. This F.I.R. was sought to be quashed on the ground of being per se illegal, mala fide and based on concocted facts. During the pendency of petition, charge-sheet dated February 21, 2005 had been filed in a hurried manner as alleged and since mala fide has been attributed to the Investigating Officer as also the first informant and the latter’s father, it is also sought to be quashed alongwith the criminal proceedings initiated thereupon. After that, another charge-sheet dated October 25, 2005 has also been filed against all the petitioners. The main dispute subsists between the husband, namely, Sanjeev Kumar Yadav, the petitioner No. 6 and his wife Smt. Deepti Yadav, the informant.
2. Shortly stated the facts giving rise to this petition are as follows :
The complainant Smt. Deepti Yadav, D/o Shri Heera Lal Yadav was married to Shri Sanjeev Kumar Yadav on 9th December, 1999. Sanjeev Kumar Yadav was then an Officer of Provincial Civil Service (now he is a member of the Central Civil Service and posted as Assistant Income-tax Commissioner, Moradabad). After her marriage, she stayed with her husband at the latter’s native village. As usual, the family members and the relatives of Smt. Deepti offered various gifts on the occasion of marriage. The grandmother of the informant, Smt. Sechna Devi had gifted a Maruti Zen Car. A Marshal Jeep was offered by Deepti’s father, but it was retained in his own name in all the relevant documents. The case of the informant is that her father was compelled by her husband to gift two drafts - one for Rs. 75,000/- and the other for Rs. 45,000/- in the name of Rajiv Kumar Yadav (brother of Sanjeev Kumar Yadav) and two more drafts of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 1 lac in the name of her husband. All these drafts were encashed by the drawees. The father of the girl also gifted various household items, Tilak, a Hero Honda Generator set, colour T.V. and other costly items of day-to day use valued at Rs. 4 lacs. The relatives of the girl also offered as presents various jewellary items to the family members of her husband. Despite huge expenditures incurred by her father, her husband and his parents were not happy with the gift/dowry items. As a matter of fact, Sanjeev Kumar Yadav and his family members had an oblique eye on the ancestral property of her father. They were all greedy persons and used to pass sarcastic remarks against her father and maligned him as a miser. They were not happy even though a cash of Rs.15 lacs and garments worth Rs. 2 lacs had been offered by her father on the occasions of ‘lagan’ and tilak ceremonies. With this greed in his mind, Sanjeev Kumar Yadav stopped coming to her when she was living at her parents’ house in Lucknow and when she conceived, Sanjeev Kumar Yadav pressed her for abortion. However, she did not agree and in due course delivered a baby son on 17th December, 2000. In spite of the fact that due intimation was sent to Sanjeev Kumar Yadav, he did not come to see her and her newly born child. The petitioner did not keep the informant in her matrimonial home for long and since she was asked to stay with her parents she came to Lucknow. In the meantime, Sanjeev Kumar Yadav who was preparing for the Central Civil Service competition started demanding a sum of Rs. 5 lacs so as to incur expenditure for his study etc. The informant’s father, despite economical constraints, but keeping in view a concept of happy life for his daughter, paid the said sum as demanded. But this too was considered to be inadequate and Sanjeev Kumar Yadav cont
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.