Rekha, daughter of fourth respondent herein with 3 respondent came to be solemnized on 15.05.2011 as per the prevalent custom and usage which resulted in its consummation and she gave birth to a baby girl who has been since named Tejal. She has also lodged an FIR in Crime No.73 of 2017 on 15.03.2017 against third respondent and others for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 406/34 of the IPC read with Sections 3 and 4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act with the Harsh Vihar Police Station, North East Delhi. On bestowing our careful and anxious consideration to the contention raised by the appellant before the High Court and reiterated before this Court we notice that undisputedly third respondent who is the husband of the appellant’s sister and who had filed an application under Section 156(3) before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Gautam Budh Nagar in application No.41 of 2018 has expired during the pendency of the present proceedings. In this background when the impugned order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate which has resulted in jurisdictional Magistrate directing the jurisdictional police, namely 2 respondent to register an FIR against appellant is perused, it would clearly disclose that report which had been called for by the Magistrate had been submitted on 11.03.2018 In the teeth of afore-stated facts and in the factual background of there being dispute between two families, which had already resulted in filing of two cases by the wife resulting in FIR being registered against the complainant (third respondent herein) and his family Members and the fact that none of the villagers including the neighbours of the complainant having supported or testified about occurrence of any incident on 26.01.2018 as claimed by the complainant, the irresistible conclusion to be drawn by this court is to accept the report of the jurisdictional police where under they have arrived at a conclusion that incident projected by the complainant appears to be false, and thereby the proceedings against the appellant deserves to be quashed.
The appeal is allowed accordingly.
Case Title: RITU TOMAR Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH (2023 INSC 410)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-001210-001210 / 2023
