Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Abhay Singh S/O Shri Ganpat Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 7 March, 2019
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1588/2019
1. Abhay Singh S/o Shri Ganpat Singh, Aged About 60
Years, R/o Vill. Dulana Teh. And Dist. Mahendragarh
(Haryana)
2. Amit Kumar S/o Shri Abhay Singh, Aged About 29 Years,
R/o Vill. Dulana Teh. And Dist. Mahendragarh (Haryana)
3. Sharda Devi W/o Shri Abhay Singh, Aged About 55 Years,
R/o Vill. Dulana Teh. And Dist. Mahendragarh (Haryana)
4. Ajay Kumar S/o Shri Abhay Singh, Aged About 24 Years,
R/o Vill. Dulana Teh. And Dist. Mahendragarh (Haryana)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Smt. Omwati W/o Shri Amit Kumar, Aged About 28 Years,
R/o Vill. Dulana Teh. And Dist. Mahendragarh (Haryana)
At Present R/o Vill. Jakharana Teh. Behror Dist. Alwar Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Mahla, PP for State HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Order 07/03/2019 I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and gone through the contents of the FIR.
Specific allegations of mal-treatment, harassment and cruelty have been leveled against petitioners No.1 to 3, who are father-in-law, husband and mother-in-law respectively of the complainant-respondent No.2.
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-1588/2019] Consequently, present petition is dismissed qua petitioners No.1 to 3.
However, considering the age and relationship of petitioners No.1 and 3, who are father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively of the complainant, their personal appearance before the court below is exempted subject to following conditions:-
(a) That the petitioners No.1 and 3 shall file an undertaking before the trial court that they shall appear before the trial court at the time of framing of charges, recording of statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and at the time of delivery of the judgment.
(b) That in the undertaking to be filed, the petitioners No.1 and 3 shall specifically state that any evidence recorded in their absence, but in presence of their counsel, shall be binding upon them.
(c) That the accused-petitioners No.1 and 3 shall also undertake to appear before the trial court as and when called by the trial Judge.
(d) That upon appearance of the petitioners No.1 and 3 before the trial court, the trial court shall accept personal bail bonds of petitioners No.1 and 3 along with bonds to be furnished by the sureties towards regular bail and same shall enure during the pendency of the trial.
Petitioner No.4 is stated to be younger brother of husband of complainant (Devar).
Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand & Anr., AIR 2010 (SC) 3363, to contend that provisions of matrimonial offences have been misused and unnecessarily petitioner No.4 has been dragged into (3 of 3) [CRLMP-1588/2019] litigation. Learned counsel contends that the complainant has widened the net too far and petitioner No.4 has nothing to gain from the alleged demand of dowry.
Issue notice to respondents qua petitioner No.4 only, for 03.05.2019. Till then, further proceedings arising out of impugned FIR qua petitioner No.4 shall remain stayed.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J Govind/ Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)