Delhi District Court
Sumit Kumar vs State on 27 May, 2024
IN THE COURT OF SH. AKASH JAIN
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-04
EAST DISTRICT, KARKARDOOMA COURTS: DELHI
CNR No. DLET01-002089-2024
Misc CRL No:- 7/2024
Sh. Sumit Kumar @ Sunny
S/o Sh. Komal Singh
R/o House No. 46A, DDA SFS Flats
Sector-7, Pocket-I, Dwarka
New Delhi-110075
Versus
1. State (NCT of Delhi)
2. Anju Kumari
W/o Sh. Puneet Kumar
R/o B-80, Gali No. 1, Rajeev Colony
Gharoli Extension, East Delhi-96
Date of Institution : 06.04.2024
Date of reserving Order : 18.05.2024
Date of pronouncement : 27.05.2024
ORDER
1. This is an application under Section 340 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C') moved on behalf of Sumit Kumar (hereinafter referred to as 'applicant') against Anju Kumari (hereinafter referred to as 'non- applicant') seeking initiation of contempt proceedings or in alternative criminal proceedings against her for commission of offences under Section 182/193/195/199/202/209/211 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC').
2. Brief facts relevant for adjudication of present AKASH Digitally signed by AKASH JAIN JAIN Date: 2024.05.27 17:32:07 +0530 Misc CRL No. 7/24 Sumit Kumar v. State & Anr. Page No. 1 of 7 application are that non-applicant got married with Punit Kumar i.e. brother of applicant on 29.05.2014 according to Hindu rites and customs. A son was also born out of said wedlock. However, the non-applicant alleged to have suffered cruelty and harassment at the hands of her husband i.e. Punit Kumar and his family members for bringing insufficient dowry. The non-applicant accordingly, filed a complaint dated 16.06.2017 against Punit Kumar and his family members including applicant herein before SHO Police Station Ghazipur. It is averred that besides allegations pertaining to demand of dowry, the non-applicant further levelled allegations against applicant herein regarding inappropriate touching by him. Consequent to this complaint, an FIR No. 353/2017 was registered at Police Station Ghazipur on 30.09.2017 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC.
3. It is averred that a divorce petition was thereafter, filed in the month of November-December, 2017 by brother of the applicant against non-applicant, in response to which, she filed her written statement in January, 2018 stating that allegations regarding inappropriate touching by applicant, as levelled in the complaint, were not true and written by her Counsel without her knowledge. Thereafter, the applicant filed a civil suit for damages on account of defamation against the non-applicant. In response to the same, written statement was further filed by non-applicant in October, 2022 wherein she reiterated that the allegations levelled by her in the complaint were incorrect and same were made without her knowledge by her Counsel. Digitally signed AKASH by AKASH JAIN Date:
JAIN 2024.05.27 17:32:15 +0530 Misc CRL No. 7/24 Sumit Kumar v. State & Anr. Page No. 2 of 7
4. It is averred on behalf of applicant that vide order dated 26.08.2022, Ld. MM in case FIR No. 353/17 was pleased to discharge the applicant from offences under Section 498-A/406/34 IPC against which a revision petition was filed by non-applicant on 03.02.2023 vide Cr. No. 35/23. It is submitted that in the said revision petition, the non-applicant again made same allegations against the applicant which had already been admitted to be false by her in written statements filed in cases bearing HMA No. 667/18 and CS No. 936/19. It is thus, prayed that non-applicant deliberately made false averments on oath in the revision petition No. 35/2023 and thus, appropriate proceedings under Section 340 Cr.P.C. r/w Section 195 (1) (b) of Cr.P.C. for offences under Sections 182/193/195/199/202/209/211/34 IPC be initiated against non-applicant.
5. No formal reply was filed on behalf of non-applicant to the present application. It was though submitted by Ld. Counsel for non-applicant that the averments in revision petition No. 35/2023 were made inadvertently in routine manner while challenging the impugned order dated 26.08.2022 vide which Ld. MM was pleased to discharge the applicant from offences under Section 498-A/406/34 IPC. It was submitted that the non-applicant did not mean to raise any fresh allegations against the applicant and she merely confined herself to the allegations levelled in the original complaint. Finally, it was submitted that the present matter pertains to a marital discord between non-applicant and brother of applicant and the application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. was merely filed by the applicant to put pressure upon the non-
AKASH Digitally signed by AKASH JAIN Misc CRL No. 7/24 Sumit Kumar v. State & Anr.
JAIN PageDate: 2024.05.27 17:32:23 +0530 No. 3 of 7 applicant to settle her cases filed against brother of the applicant.
6. Vide order dated 10.04.2024, this Court was pleased to order preliminary inquiry into the alleged offences in terms of Section 340 Cr.P.C. r/w Section 195(1)(b) Cr.P.C.. During preliminary inquiry, record clerk i.e. Assistant Ahlmad (JJA), posted in the Court of Ld. CJ-01, South-West, Dwarka Courts, Delhi was examined as CW-1. She brought the record of Civil Suit No. 936/19 titled as Sumit Kumar @ Sunny v. Anju Kumari, wherein written statement was filed by non-applicant on 17.10.2022. Copy of the said written statement is Ex. CW1/A (colly) (OSR). Thereafter, Assistant Ahlmad (JJA) posted in the Court of Ld. Principal Judge, Family Courts, East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi was examined as CW-2. He brought the record of HMA No. 667/18 titled as Punit Kumar v. Anju Kumari, wherein written statement was filed by non-applicant on 15.10.2018. Copy of the said written statement is Ex. CW2/A (colly) (OSR).
7. I have heard the arguments on behalf of both the parties and carefully perused the record.
8. It is admitted position of facts that non-applicant had filed a complaint dated 16.06.2017 against her husband Punit Kumar and his family members including applicant herein regarding cruelty, cheating and outraging the modesty before SHO Police Station Ghazipur. In the said complaint, the non-applicant had levelled allegation against the applicant that the applicant was AKASH Digitally signed by AKASH JAIN Misc CRL No. 7/24 Sumit Kumar v. State & Anr.
JAIN Page No. Date: 2024.05.27 17:32:29 +0530 4 of 7 harboring evil intention against non-applicant and used to inappropriately touch her.
9. It is also not in dispute, as also brought on record by CW-2, that the non-applicant had denied the allegations regarding inappropriate touching by the applicant in her written statement filed in response to the divorce petition bearing HMA No. 667/18 filed by brother of applicant in the month of November/ December, 2017. The relevant excerpt from the written statement of non- applicant i.e. Ex. CW 2/A (colly) is reproduced as under:-
"..... 22. That the contents of para no. 21 of the petition false, concocted, baseless and denied. It is specifically denied that respondent could stoop down to the level of levelling such false, frivolous and baseless allegations on the petitioner's brother by saying that the petitioner's younger brother has an evil eyes, on her and the petitioner's elder brother is of criminal character, this clearly shows that the respondent never wanted to stay in the matrimonial home with the petitioner, rather her sole intention was to live separately with the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner's younger brother has never having evil eyes on the respondent and respondent has never stated such facts to any one or the petitioner also but without her knowledge, her previous counsel has mentioned this wrong facts. It is further submitted that the wife of elder brother has also been deserted by the petitioner's family...."
10. The non-applicant further denied the allegations regarding inappropriate touching by the applicant in her written statement filed in response to the Civil Suit No. 936/19 for damages on account of defamation filed by the applicant in the year 2018. The said written statement is brought on record by CW- 1 and the relevant excerpt from the same i.e. Ex. CW 1/A (colly) is Digitally signed reproduced as under:- AKASH by AKASH JAIN Date:
JAIN 2024.05.27 17:32:35 +0530 Misc CRL No. 7/24 Sumit Kumar v. State & Anr. Page No. 5 of 7 "..... 14. That the defendant has already made submission in her written statement in case under Section 13(1) (ia) HM Act petition, that the defendant has not stated to her counsel to write the alleged facts that the plaintiff has evil eyes towards her and he touched me at any time and that she felt that there is a relation of brother-in-law and sister- in-law, he had done it in just joking, the defendant has also stated specifically that plaintiff has never having evil eyes on her and she has never stated so to any one but her counsel has mentioned that fact without her knowledge. It is submitted that generally the parties does not read whole plaint or drafting generally used to sign on papers under the belief that every thing will be correct, however in the present case that above mentioned three and half lives come into the petitions as well as in the complaint to CAW Cell inadvertently due to the mistake of typist from the text saved of other parties, but as soon as this facts came to the knowledge of defendant she has rectified it in the W.S filed in petition under Section 13(1)(i-a) HMA petition filed by the brother of the plaintiff, and for the same regret hence also under these circumstances the cause of action if any more, does not submits and the present suit is liable to be dismissed....."
11. The averments made on oath in the aforesaid written statements by the non-applicant prima-facie show that the allegations levelled by her in her complaint dated 16.06.2017, that the applicant was harboring evil intentions against her and used to inappropriately touch her, were false. Yet, the non-applicant reiterated these allegations on oath in her revision petition bearing No. 35/2023 filed on 03.02.2023 before this Court while praying for setting aside the order dated 26.08.2022. No suitable justification could be afforded on behalf of non-applicant for incorporating the allegations against applicant as mentioned above, when she herself denied such allegations in simultaneous litigations between the parties. It is thus, apparent that the non-
applicant deliberately made false averments in the revision petition No. 35/2023 with malafide intention to Digitally secure a signed by AKASH AKASH JAIN Misc CRL No. 7/24 Sumit Kumar v. State & Anr.
JAIN Date: 2024.05.27 17:32:41 +0530 Page No. 6 of 7 favourable order and to receive undue advantage in the revision proceedings.
12. Thus, a complaint be made in terms of Section 340 Cr.P.C. r/w 195(1)(b) Cr.P.C. to Ld. CMM, East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi through Reader of this Court namely, Sh. Suresh Kumar Yadav for taking appropriate action against the non-applicant under Sections 193/196/199/209/211 IPC in accordance with law. The non-applicant is directed to furnish personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- with one surety of the like amount before this Court with the directions to appear before Ld. CMM, East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi on 04.06.2024 at 02:00 PM.
13. The application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. is accordingly disposed of.
14. Copy of this order along with Trial Court record be sent back to the Ld. Trial Court for information and compliance.
Digitally signed AKASH by AKASH JAIN
Date:
JAIN 2024.05.27
17:32:47 +0530
ANNOUNCED IN OPEN (AKASH JAIN)
COURT ON 27.05.2024 ASJ-04, EAST DISTRICT
KARKARDOOMA COURTS
DELHI
This order contains 7 pages and each paper is signed by me.
AKASH Digitally signed by
AKASH JAIN
JAIN Date: 2024.05.27
17:32:53 +0530
(AKASH JAIN)
ASJ-04, EAST DISTRICT
KARKARDOOMA COURTS
DELHI
Misc CRL No. 7/24 Sumit Kumar v. State & Anr. Page No. 7 of 7