IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for careful scrutiny of allegations in matrimonial disputes, the potential misuse of legal provisions, and the importance of examining witness testimony during trial rather than at the pre-trial stage.

JUDGMENT :

MAYANK KUMAR JAIN, J.

1. Heard Sri I.K. Chaturvedi, learned Senior counsel assisted by Sri Rajnish Dubey and Bhuwan Raj, Advocate for the applicants. Sri Dharmendra Singhal, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Utkarsh Khanna, Advocate, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and Sri Vijay Kumar Rai, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 10664 of 2022, State vs. Jagmohini Gupta and others arising out of Case Crime No. 62 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 and 406 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Sector-58, District Gautam Buddha Nagar pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, (Senior Division) Court no. 1, Gautam Buddha Nagar as well as charge-sheet dated 09.12.2021 and 15.11.2022 and cognizance order dated 03.10.2022 passed in aforesaid case.

3. The allegations made in the FIR are summerzied as under:

(a) The informant Mrs. Harshil Mehta, is the wife of applicant no. 4, Harsh Mohan Gupta. Marriage of the informant was solemnized on 20.11.2018. She and her family were given to understand that her husband was employed as Assistant Manager at PWC, Gurgaon. He was drawing a lucrative salary. The applicants also stated that they will accept her even in two pairs of raiment. Applicants made demands of gift/dowry from her parents. Post registration of the marriage, applicants compelled the parents of the informant to organize a destination wedding for celebrating the marriage and asked to gift heavy gold and silver jewellery items to them. Applicant no. 1 has time and again quoted to the family of the informant that they had incurred about one crore rupees in the marriage of their daughter and their sons therefore, wedding should also be of the same status.

(b) Since the marriage was already registered, parents of the informant had no choice but to succumb to their demand and organize a three day function at Jim Corbett, Ramnagar. Gold and silver jewellery and gift items, as per the demands of the applicants were provided to them. During the reception, applicant no. 1 humiliated the mother of the informant for not providing sufficient jewellery.

(c) the informant moved to Australia with her husband Harsh Mohan Gupta. He started abusing and assaulting her physically and mentally. He used to call her fat and said that he desired for a pretty wife but married her for the sake of money. At one occasion he physically assaulted the informant in public place and thereafter apologised on being warned by his friends. In India, applicants no. 2 and 3 were continuously harassing the parents of the informant by demanding money. The applicants also compelled the informant and her parents to organize a ‘Teej’ function for them and demanded other expensive gifts for that occasion. The parents of the informant fulfilled their demands believing that the applicants would stop harassing their daughter.

(d) After few days the informant was thrown out from the house by Harsh Mohan Gupta. He forced her parents to call her back to India. The nature of Harsh Mohan Gupta was violent and aggressive towards the informant. On several occasions she approached the applicants but they always denied accepting her and refused to permit her to stay with them. Many times the informant requested her husband to come to India and resolve the issues between them, but he refused. Number of times she visited the house of her in-laws but every time she was thrown out of their house. They denied that she was a part of their family. They also refused to return the jewellery and ‘Stridhan’ of belonging to the informant.

(e) Due to the death of his father, Harsh Mohan Gupta came to India. The informant visited her husband and his family asking them to let her stay with them and accept her but they refused. They continued to harass her due to insufficient dowry/money. The ‘Stridhan’ and oth