The judgment emphasizes the independence of civil and criminal proceedings, the absence of limitation bar, and the continuous nature of cruelty in dowry harassment cases.

JUDGMENT

1. This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashment of FIR in Crime No.52/2021 registered at Police Station Seondha, District Datia for offence under Sections 323, 498-A, 506/34 of IPC read with Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. Before adverting to the facts of the case, this Court would like to point out certain disturbing facts. On 7/2/2022, the counsel for the applicants had made a statement that the applicant no.3-Pankaj Soni has expired, therefore, a week's time may be granted to file necessary application for deleting his name. Thereafter, the applicants filed IA No. 3180/2022 seeking recall of the order dated 7/2/2022 on the ground that by mistake the counsel for the applicants had made a false statement that applicant no.3-Pankaj Soni has expired, but in fact he is still alive. Since the statement regarding death of applicant no.3 was made by a Lawyer having a considerable long period of standing in the Bar and, therefore, it cannot be presumed that it was a rash and negligent act on the part of the counsel. It was deliberately made most probably in order to seek adjournment. A new method of killing their own client for the purpose of Bench hunting cannot be appreciated and should be avoided. It is hoped and believed that before making any statement regarding the death of a litigant, the counsel would make out thorough search and would not make false statement in order to get the matter adjourned.

3. Be that as it may.

4. According to the applicants, the applicant no.1-Smt. Meera Soni is the mother-in-law, whereas applicant no.2-Chhotelal Soni is the father-in-law of the respondent no.2. Applicant no.3-Pankaj Soni is the Jeth and applicant no.4-Smt. Rinki Soni is Jethani of respondent no.2. Applicant no.5-Vikram @ Vicky Soni is Devar of respondent no.2 and applicant no.6-Neeraj Soni is the husband of the respondent no.2. The respondent no.2 made a written complaint to the Police Station Seondha, District Datia on the allegation that she got married to applicant no.6-Neeraj Soni on 8/3/2019 as per Hindu rites and rituals. At the time of her marriage, Rs.8,00,000/- in cash, 7 Tola of gold were given and after her marriage, when she went to her matrimonial house, the applicant no.3-Pankaj Soni met with an accident and thereafter, the applicants started alleging that the father of the respondent no.2 has given insufficient dowry and only because of marriage of respondent no.2 with applicant no.6, the accident has taken place and lot of money has been spent for the treatment of the applicant no.3 and, therefore, she should bring money from her parents. When it was replied by respondent no.2 that her father is having a meager salary and he has already given Stridhan in accordance with his financial condition and he has to marry his other daughters also, therefore, he would not be in a position to give any more money, then the applicants started scolding that either she should bring a car or an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- and only then she would be allowed to stay in her matrimonial house properly. Accordingly, she informed her parents about the demand made by the applicants. Her younger brother came to her matrimonial house on the festival of Diwali and at that time also, the applicants had demanded Rs.4,00,000/- or a car from her brother and when he specifically replied that they would not be in a position to fulfill the demands of the applicants, then the respondent no.2 was ousted from her matrimonial house alongwith her brother and even her gold and silver ornaments were not given. At the time of ouster, she was pregnant and as her daughter could not get proper treatment, therefore, she is handicapped from birth. At the time of her ouster everybody was alleging that unless and until she brings a car or an amount of Rs.4,00,000/-, she should not come back to her matrimonial house, otherwise she would be killed. Even applicant no.1-Smt. Meera Soni had alleged that in case if respondent