Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Vishnu Chandra Gupta, J.
Jitendra Kumar Srivastava and Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and Ors. - Respondent
Criminal Misc. Application Nos. 3909 of 2007 and 1148 of 2008
Decided On : 15-12-2014
498A - Jurisdiction - 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC, 3/4 DP Act - The court quashed the proceedings against the maternal uncle and aunt of the husband, who were not relatives of the husband within the meaning of section 498A IPC. The court also held that the court at Ambedkar Nagar had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as part of the cause of action arose there.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved allegations of demand for dowry and causing cruelty upon the wife by the in-laws. The husband and his relatives were accused of persistently demanding a car and causing mental and physical cruelty to the wife.
Finding of the Court:
The court quashed the proceedings against the maternal uncle and aunt of the husband, as they were not relatives of the husband within the meaning of section 498A IPC. The court also dismissed the petition of the rest of the accused. The court held that the court at Ambedkar Nagar had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as part of the cause of action arose there.
Issues: The issues involved the interpretation of the term 'relative of her husband' in section 498A IPC, the territorial jurisdiction of the court, and the continuation of the offence under section 498A IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the maternal uncle and aunt of the husband were not relatives of the husband within the meaning of section 498A IPC. The court also held that the court at Ambedkar Nagar had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as part of the cause of action arose there.
Final Decision: The court quashed the proceedings against the maternal uncle and aunt of the husband and dismissed the petition of the rest of the accused. The court held that the court at Ambedkar Nagar had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as part of the cause of action arose there.
Vishnu Chandra Gupta, J.
1. By means of Criminal Misc. Case No. 3909 of 2007 under section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (for short Cr.P.C.) petitioners Jitendra Kumar Srivastava (Maternal uncle Mama), Manju Srivastava (Maternal aunt Mami), Vijay Kumar Srivastava (father in law), Usha Srivastava (Mother in law), Manish Kumar Srivastava (Dever) and Vivek Kumar Srivastava (Devar) and in Criminal Misc. Case No. 1148 of 2008, under section 482 Cr.P.C., petitioner Neeraj Kumar Srivastava (Husband) have prayed for quashing of charge-sheet No. 157/2007 dated 24.8.2007 filed in case crime No. 225 of 2007 under sections 498A, 323, 504, and 506 IPC and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Kotwali Akbarpur District Ambedkar Nagar and also summoning order dated 26.10.2007 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar in Criminal Case No. 3321 of 2007 State v. Vijay Kumar Srivastava and others. Since in both these petitions common question of facts and law are involved so, they are being disposed of by a common order.
2. Brief facts for deciding these cases are that Hemant Krishan Srivastava opposite party No. 2, lodged a First Information Report (for short F.I.R.) alleging therein that marriage of his sister Kalpana Srivastava had taken place at Allahabad on 15.10.2002 with Neeraj Kumar Srivastava, (petitioner in Criminal Misc. No. 1148 of 2008). At the time of marriage petitioners Vijay Kumar Srivastava (father in law), Usha Srivastava (Mother in law), Manish Kumar Srivastava (Dever) and Vivek Kumar Srivastava (Devar) demanded a sum of Rs. 1 lac cash and one Santro car. However, Vidai took place but aforesaid demand by petitioners persisted. After marriage husband Neeraj Kumar Srivastava went to Nagpur alongwith her wife Smt. Kalpana Srivastava where Neeraj Kumar Srivastava was doing business related to computer. Opposite party No. 2 alleged that whenever Smt. Kalpnana Srivastava used to visit Allahabad, she complained against the petitioners for causing physical and mental cruelty by her in-laws. At Nagpur in April, 2005 a female child born out of wedlock of Neeraj Kumar Srivastava and Kalpana Srivastava. Parents and brother of Kalpana Srivastava visited Nagpur and gave gifts and ornament etc. on the occasion of birth of child, but in-laws were not satisfied and continued to press their demand of car. In June, 2005, she came to her Maika-village Shahjadpur, Akabarpur, District Ambedkar Nagar where function of birth of Kalpana's daughter was arranged by opposite party No. 2, in which in-laws were invited. This function was attended by Vijay Kumar Srivastava (father-in-law) Usha Srivastava (mother-in-law) Vivek Kumar Srivastava (Dever) and Sarika Srivastava (sister in law). Thereafter the parents of Kalpana Srivastava requested to in laws for Vidai of her daughter Kalpana Srivastava, but they refused to take Kalpana Srivastava back to matrimonial home and said that unless the demand of car is fulfilled, they shall not allow Kalpana Srivastava in their house. Kalpana Srivastava continued to remain in her parents' house. The in laws even refused to talk her parents on phone. The family members of Kalpana Srivastava went to matrimonial home at Allahabad for several time and requested for Vidai of Kalpana Srivastava. Once they went to Allahabad along with Kalpana Srivastava, but in laws did not permit them to enter into house. Thereafter, opposite party No. 2 went to Nagpur. He found that the house of Neeraj Kumar Srivastava was locked. He asked the whereabouts of Neeraj Kumar Srivastava from his parents, but they did not inform about Neeraj Kumar Srivastava. Consequently he returned back from Nagpur.
3. On 4.3.2007 again opposite party No. 2 along with Kalpana Srivastava went to Nagpur. He found that the house where Neeraj Kumar Srivastava was residing as tenant, was closed . He contacted to landlord of Neeraj Srivastava who informed that Neeraj Kumar Srivastava is not living in the house for last one and half years and
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
