The court affirmed that allegations in matrimonial disputes must be substantiated with clear evidence to prevent misuse of legal processes.

JUDGMENT :

Gajendra Kumar, J.

1. Since these applications arising out of same case crime number, they have been heard together and are being decided by a common order.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the first informant/opposite party no.2 and learned AGA for the State-respondents.

3. The instant Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a request to quash the Case No.1643 of 2012 arising out of Case Crime No. 2/2012, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act, pending in the Court of A.C.J.M.-VIII, Ghaziabad.

4. The prosecution story in brief of the instant case are as follows:-

Marriage of applicant (Dr. Kalind Parashar) with the opposite party no.2 was solemnized on 14.02.2019 at Destination Resort, Solan, Himanchal Pradesh according to Hindu Rites and Rituals. Thereafter, on 24.02.2019, the applicant (Dr. Kalind Parashar) along with opposite party no.2 left for USA, where they have blessed with a son on 02.02.2010 in USA and all were living there happily, but due to some difference of opinion, the relationship between applicant (Dr. Kalind Parashar) and opposite party no.2 became strained, thereafter, applicant (Dr. Kalind Parashar) filed a complaint for divorce on 09.02.2012 before Oakland County, Circuit Court, Family Division, State of Michigan. In the said case, an ex-parte interim order regarding custody and parenting time was passed on 10.02.2012 by the concerned Judge of Family Court directing the applicant (Dr. Kalind Parashar) and opposite party no.2 not to change the domicile and residence of the minor child from the State of Michigan without a written order from the Court. Thereafter, on 23.03.2012, an Application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved by the opposite party no.2, though, an FIR has been lodged by the opposite party no.2 against the applicants and three other co-accused persons with false and frivolous allegations, which was registered as Case Crime No.02 of 2012, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 and 406 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Ghaziabad. Prior to filing of application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., the opposite party no.2 had made a complaint before S.S.P., Ghaziabad, in which the SHO was directed to conduct an inquiry and submit a report, thereafter, making a thorough enquiry by SHO concerned, submitted the report mentioning therein that there is no truth in the complaint of opposite party no.2 and no further legal action is required in the complaint. Opposite party no.2 had also moved an application before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Tees Hazari Court, Delhi under the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which is still pending consideration. On 26.04.2012, the American Court has issued warrant of arrest of opposite party no.2 as she has violated order of the Court in relation to carrying away minor child, who is U.S. citizen by virtue of his birth in U.S.A. and carried him to India. On 26.05.2012, I.O. without conducting a proper and fair investigation, has submitted the charge-sheet against the applicant and three other co-accused persons under the aforesaid sections. On 29.05.2012, in the divorce petition filed by the applicant (Dr. Kalind Parashar) against the opposite party no.2, even the concerned Judge of Family Court, State of Michigan has passed an order dissolving the marriage between the parties.

4. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the malicious proceedings have been lodged by opposite party no.2 against the entire family members including the present applicants, who are 'Nanand' and husband of opposi