Delhi High Court
Madhu Bala & Ors vs State on 16 October, 2015
Author: Suresh Kait
$~18
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 16th October, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. No.5376/2014
MADHU BALA & ORS ..... Petitioners
Represented by: Mr. M. Shamikh, Advocate.
Versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr.Mukesh Kumar, Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State with
SI Subhash Kumar, P.S. Shahadara.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
CRL.M.C. No.5376/2014
1. By way of this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have assailed the order dated 15.10.2014
passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Revision
No.18/13.
2. On the complaint made by the complainant, FIR No.111/2010 was
registered at Police Station Shahadara, Delhi, for the offences punishable
under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC. After investigation, police filed the
chargesheet before the learned Trial Court. While taking cognizance, the
learned Magistrate vide its order dated 25.11.2013 discharged the
petitioners.
3. Being aggrieved, the complainant and the State filed the aforesaid
Criminal Revision No.18/13, which was allowed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge vide impugned order dated 15.10.2014.
4. It is not in dispute that no complaint was ever made against the
petitioners before the present complaint in issue. The complainant left the
matrimonial house on 12.06.2009 and on the said date she called up at
number 1000 and made a statement to the police which is at page No. 96.
Typed copy of the same is at page No.97, which reads as under:-
" It is stated that I reside at the above said
address and my marriage was solemnized on
23.11.2005. Since the day of my marriage till date
I was given beatings abusing. Today on
12.06.2009, at about 7 PM, my husband under the
influence of liquor gave beating and went away
from the house. I am going to my parental home
with my parents. Necessary action be taken. You
have recorded my statement, heard and the same
are correct. I am going with my father in empty
hands."
5. Thereafter, the complainant approached the CAW Cell vide
complaint dated 16.06.2009 and made allegations against the petitioners,
which was culminated into the FIR mentioned above.
6. It is pertinent to mention here that after making the complaint on
16.06.2009, the husband of the complainant expired on 21.06.2009. No
other complaint was filed against the petitioners before filing the
complaint before the CAW Cell and in her statement dated 12.06.2009;
the complainant did not make any allegations against the petitioner except
her husband, who already died on 21.06.2009. It is true that in the
complaint dated 16.06.2009, there are allegations against the petitioners.
However, the same are an afterthought and have been made to implicate
the petitioners in this case for the reasons best known to her. Husband of
the complainant has died immediately after filing complaint with CAW
Cell. The learned Trial Court has rightly recorded that there is no medical
document on record to show that the complainant was ever treated with
cruelty. There was no allegation against the petitioners in the statement
recorded by the police on 12.06.2009 when the complainant left her
matrimonial house, wherein she specifically stated that her husband under
the influence of liquor, for no reason, used to beat her and due to said
reason she left the matrimonial house. Moreover, the petitioners had paid
an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- at the stage of bail.
7. Keeping in view the facts recorded above, I confirm the order dated
25.11.2013 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate and set aside
the order dated 15.10.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge in Criminal Revision No.18/13.
8. In view of the above, the present appeal is allowed.
Crl. M.A. No.18335/2014 (for stay)
With the disposal of the petition itself, the present application has
become infructuous. The same is dismissed accordingly.
SURESH KAIT
(JUDGE)
OCTOBER 16, 2015
Sb/jg
