1. This order shall dispose of MCRC Nos. 13479/2018 filed by Shri Ashutosh Mishra and Ors. and MCRC No. 4599/2018 filed by Smt. Jyoti Daipuriya.

2. These applications under Section 482 of CrPC have been filed against the order dated 30/12/2017 passed by the JMFC, Bhind in RCT No. 1803/2017 by which the trial Court has taken cognizance of offence under Sections 498-A and 323/34 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. The necessary facts for the disposal of the present applications in short are that on 12/12/2017, the respondent No. 2 lodged a report at Police Station Dehat, District Bhind alleging therein that her marriage was solemnized with applicant No. 1 Ashutosh Mishra on 26/4/2016 as per Hindu Rites and Rituals and her father had given sufficient dowry including one four-wheeler and an amount of Rupees Five Lakhs in cash with gold and silver ornaments and other domestic articles. After 3-4 days of her marriage, the applicants started demanding an additional amount of Rupees Ten Lakhs and when respondent No. 2 replied to her in-laws that her father has already given sufficient dowry to them and now he cannot fulfill their further demand, then the applicants started harassing and beating respondent No.2 and scolded that unless and until respondent No. 2 brings an additional amount of Rupees Ten Lakhs, she cannot live in her matrimonial house and she was forced to leave her matrimonial house. It was further alleged that respondent No. 2 is presently residing in her parental home.

4. The police, after recording the statements of the witnesses, filed the charge-sheet for above-mentioned offences. The trial Court by order dated 30/12/2017 took cognizance of the offence under Sections 498-A, 323/34 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

5. It is submitted by the counsel for the applicants that respondent No. 2 had stayed in her matrimonial house only for 3 to 4 days and, thereafter, she left her matrimonial house and on her own free will, she is staying in her parental home. It is further alleged that in fact respondent No. 2 was in love with somebody else and, therefore, she did not allow applicant No. 1 even to touch her on the first night of the marriage and she also told applicant No. 1 that she has been married contrary to her wishes. It is submitted that when respondent No. 2 did not come back to her matrimonial house inspite of every efforts made by the applicants, then applicant No. 1 filed an application under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act. However, when he realized that respondent No. 2 has already decided not to stay with the applicants, therefore, applicant No. 1 withdrew his application under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act and filed another application under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act for grant of divorce on the ground of desertion. It is submitted that by way of counter-blast to the petition under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, this false complaint has been lodged. It is further submitted that as the applicants were being threatened by respondent No. 2, therefore, applications were given by the applicants to the police authorities expressing their apprehension of false implication. It is submitted that inspite of the applications given by the applicants, which were prior in time, the police registered the FIR against the applicants and without conducting any enquiry, filed the charge-sheet and the trial Court has taken cognizance of the matter. It is further submitted that there is a growing tendency in the society to falsely implicate the near and dear relatives of the husband of the complainant. It is well established principle of law that in order to prosecute the near and dear relatives of the husband of the complainant, there has to be specific allegation against them but in the present case, except making wild, vague and omnibus allegations against the applicants of demand of Rupees Ten Lakhs and harassment, no substantive allegations have been made. It is submitted