Heard Sri Tarun Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Deepak Dubey, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 24.02.2017 lodged by respondent no. 4 and registered as Case Crime No. 28/2017 at P.S. Mahila Thana, u/s 498-A, 323, 504, 377, 506, 307 I.P.C. read with Section 3, 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. A further prayer has been made by the petitioners to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R.

3. Pleadings between the parties have been exchanged. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of finally at the admission stage.

4. The facts of the case as emerging from the allegations made in the F.I.R. and the pleadings of the parties are that the respondent no. 4 Dr. (Smt.) Surabhi gave a written report at P.S.- Mahila Thana, District- Agra on 24.02.2017 at about 21.45 hours stating therein that marriage between her and Dr. Sumit Agrawal, son of petitioner no. 3, Dr. Murari Lal Agrawal, resident of Ghantaghar Hathras, presently residing in Khandari, P.S.- Hariparvat, Agra, was solemnized on 22.02.2016 in which her father had spent about Rs. 1,20,00,000/- which included a sum of Rs. 40,00,000/- in cash and ornaments of gold and silver worth Rs. 50,00,000/- were given by her father to the petitioners as dowry and Rs. 30,00,000/- spent on purchase of valuable clothes, appliances and articles of domestic use and reception etc. However, her husband petitioner no. 1, Dr. Sumit Agrawal, mother-in-law petitioner no. 2, Smt. Rupa Agrawal, father-in-law petitioner no. 3, Dr. Murari Agrawal and sister-in-law (nanad) petitioner no. 4, Dr. (Smt.) Surabhi were not satisfied with the dowry given to them at the time of marriage and hence, they started demanding Rs. 50,00,000/- in cash and a flat in Delhi as additional dowry from the respondent no. 4 and when she expressed her inability to fulfill their demands of dowry, they started torturing and maltreating her and abusing her father saying that he had promised to pay a sum of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- in cash as dowry but he had paid to them only Rs. 40,00,000/- on account of which the honour of their family had been adversely affected. They also threatened that until their demands of additional dowry of Rs. 50,00,000/- and one flat were fulfilled, they would not allow her to stay in her matrimonial home. Her husband in a state of intoxication used to beat her and force her to have unnatural sex with him. On 26.02.2016, her husband petitioner no. 1, Dr. Sumit Agrawal took her to Maldives where after showing her obscene video films, he insisted on having sexual intercourse with her in the same manner as depicted in the obscene video films and when she protested, she was beaten by him with fists and kicks who announced that until his demands for additional dowry were fulfilled, she would be subjected by him to the same treatment. The respondent no. 4 with the intention of saving the honour of her family and her marital life, kept tolerating everything. After returning from Maldives on 29.02.2016, her husband had kept her in a room in AIIMS guest house in New Delhi where her sister-in-law (nanad) petitioner no. 4, Dr. (Smt.) Surabhi came with her husband petitioner no. 5, Dr. Bhavuk Garg and incited her husband and then both of them started torturing her for non-fulfillment of their demands for additional dowry. Since petitioner no. 4, Dr. (Smt.) Surabhi was repeatedly asking her to come to her house in Delhi, she went to the house of petitioner no. 4 on 15.04.2016 along with her father and after her father went away to attend a conference in Delhi, leaving her behind with her husband petitioner no. 1, Dr. Sumit Agrawal an