Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Uttarakhand High Court

Smt. Sahnaz W/O Gaffar vs State Of Uttarakhand on 10 May, 2012

Author: Prafulla C. Pant

Bench: Prafulla C. Pant

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
                     NAINITAL
            Criminal Writ Petition No. 393 of 2012

     1.   Smt. Sahnaz W/o Gaffar
     2.   Gaffar S/o Fakira
          Both R/o Mohalla Saniya Sarai, Machiyaro Ka
          Mohalla, P.S. Kutubsher, District Saharanpur (U.P.).

                                                  .........Petitioners

                               Versus

     1- State of Uttarakhand, through            Secretary Home,
        Secretariat Complex, Dehradun.
     2- Station House Officer, P.S.            Jwalapur,   District
        Haridwar.
     3- Sania @ Sonia W/o Raees, D/o            Rasid Ahmad R/o
        Mohalla Kotrawan P.S. Kotwali           Jwalapur, District
        Haridwar.
                                                  ......Respondents
Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate, present for the petitioners.
Mr. S.S. Adhikari, A.G.A., present for the State.

Hon'ble Prafulla C. Pant, J.

Heard.

2) By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought quashing of the First Information Report dated 19.03.2012, registered as Crime No. 92 of 2012, relating to offences punishable under Section 498A, 323, 504, of I.P.C., and one punishable under Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, at Police Station-Jwalapur, District Haridwar.

3) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioner No.1 Smt. Sahnaz is mother-in-law and petitioner No.2 Gaffar is father-in-law of the respondent No.3 Sania @ Sonia. The marriage of respondent No.3 said to have taken place with the son of the petitioners in the year 2010. It is pointed out that admittedly respondent No.2 has left the house of her husband in November 2011. It is contended that it is hard to believe that in March 2012, petitioners went to the house of the complainant from Saharanpur to beat her. It is also pleaded that petitioners used to live separately from their son (husband of the complainant). It is argued that it is abuse of process of law on the part of the complainant to implicate the petitioners in a criminal case due to the matrimonial discord between respondent No.3 and her husband.

4)         Admit the petition.

5)         Learned counsel for the State prays for and is

allowed six weeks' time to file the counter affidavit.

6) Issue notice to respondent No.3 Sania @ Sonia, who may also file her counter affidavit within a period of six weeks.

7) Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned counsel for the State, and after going through the papers on record, as an interim measure, it is directed that petitioners namely Smt. Sahnaz and Gaffar 3 shall not be arrested in connection with First Information Report dated 19.03.2012, registered as Crime No. 92 of 2012, relating to offences punishable under Section 498A, 323, 504, of I.P.C., and one punishable under Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, at Police Station-Jwalapur, District Haridwar, during investigation, provided they cooperate with the investigating agency. (Stay Application No. 4389 of 2012, stands disposed of).

8)           List after six weeks.




                                      (Prafulla C. Pant, J.)
10.05.2012
JM