The main legal point established is that obtaining an ex parte decree for restitution of conjugal rights without intention to enforce it does not absolve the accused of their conduct, and the allegations of the complainant must be considered.

JUDGMENT :

Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia, J.

1. This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashment of FIR in Crime No. 0562/2020 registered at Police Station Bhind Dehat, District Bhind, for offence under Sections 498-A, 323, 34 of IPC and under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. The applicant No. 1 is the father-in-law whereas the applicant No. 2 is the mother-in-law. The applicant No. 4 is husband and the applicant No. 3 is the younger brother of the husband (Devar) of the complainant.

3. The necessary facts for disposal of the present application in short are that the respondent No. 3 has lodged a FIR against the applicants on the allegations that she got married to the respondent No. 4 on 24.6.2011 in accordance with Hindu rites and rituals. Her father had given sufficient dowry as per his financial capacity including one motorcycle, silver and gold ornaments and other household articles. The moment respondent No. 3 reached her matrimonial house, the applicants started demanding additional dowry from her. They also started harassing her physically and mentally on the allegation that less dowry has been given, therefore, her father should get a house constructed for the applicants and the respondent No. 3 must bring Rs. 50,000/- towards her expenses. On 5.9.2020, the respondent No. 3 was beaten by the applicants, as a result of which, she lost her consciousness. The entire incident was narrated by her daughter to the mother of respondent no. 3 and thereafter, she was shifted by her parents to the District Hospital, Bhind where she was treated. The entire atrocities were informed to her parents who also tried to convince the applicants but they did not agree and, accordingly, the FIR was lodged.

4. Challenging the FIR, it is submitted by the counsel for the applicants that the applicant No. 3 had filed an application under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. Although the respondent No. 3 was served but she did not appear and, accordingly, by judgment dated 28.3.2018 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhind in Case No. 221/2017 (HMA), a decree for restitution of conjugal rights was passed, however, the respondent No. 3 did not return back. Accordingly, the applicant No. 1 gave an application to the Collector, Bhind against the FIR lodged by the respondent No. 3 and, accordingly, it was prayed that free and fair investigation be conducted as the FIR has been lodged after nine years of marriage and a closure report may be filed.

5. Although it is submitted by the counsel for the applicants that a similar application was given to the Director General of Police, State of M.P., Inspector General of Police, Chambal Division, Gwalior, Superintendent of Police, District Bhind, CSP, Bhind, SHO Police Station Dehat, District Bhind but no acknowledgment of receipt has been filed. It is further submitted that a Panchnama was also prepared on 28.11.2013 by the Panchas that the marriage of the respondent No. 3 was performed with the applicant No. 4 and the applicant No. 4 has tried to take his wife back on four occasions but she did not agree and, accordingly, the Panchnama was prepared so that the same can be used in case if any offence is registered. Similarly, an application on 30.5.2015 was made to Superintendent of Police, Bhind mentioning that in fact, the respondent No. 3 is not doing any household work and every time Panchayat is required to be called for bringing respondent No. 3 back to her matrimonial house and the respondent No. 3 is in habit of making false report and she also frequently threatens the applicant No. 2 that she would falsely implicate the applicants in a criminal case and, accordingly, it was prayed that action be taken against the respondent No. 3 and her parents and a prayer was also made that arrangement be made for sending the respondent No. 3 with the applicant No. 4.

6. Per contra, it is submitted by the counsel for the State that the FIR clearly disclo