Uttarakhand High Court
C482/1189/2017 on 6 December, 2022
Office Notes, reports,
orders or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions and COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
Registrar's order with
Signatures
C482 No.1189 of 2017
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
Mr. Sagar Kothari, Advocate for the
applicants.
Mr. B.P.S. Mer, Brief Holder for the State of
Uttarakhand.
The instant C-482 application has been
preferred by the father-in-law and mother-in-law of
complainant/respondent no.2, who had registered
the FIR being FIR No.84 of 2014 dated 23.08.2014.
The named four accused persons i.e. Sachin Sethi,
Subhash Sethi, Smt. Santosh and Sweta for their
alleged involvement in commission of offence
under Sections 323, 504, 498-A IPC and Section
3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
The matter was investigated upon and a
charge sheet has been submitted as against the
present applicants, as well as other co-accused
persons being Charge Sheet No.161 of 2014 dated
27.09.2014, its based on which the summoning
order has been issued by the court of Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Dehradun on 19.02.2015.
Hence, the C-482 application challenging the
proceedings of Criminal Case No.614 of 2015 State
vs. Sachin Sethi and others as well as the charge
sheet and the cognizance order.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for
the applicants that so far as the summoning order is
concerned as against one of the accused person i.e.
the husband of respondent no.2 i.e. Sachin Sethi,
the matter travelled to this Court in C-482
Application No.812 of 2015 Sachin Sethi vs. State
of Uttarakhand and another and the Coordinate
Bench by the judgment of 10.04.2017, had allowed
the C-482 Application and consequently, the
impugned charge sheet dated 27.09.2014 and the
summoning order as rendered in the said Criminal
Case No.220 of 2014 State vs. Sachin Sethi and
others, was quashed. In fact if the charge sheet
dated 27.09.2014 is taken into consideration that is
an akin charge sheet, which is the subject matter of
the present proceedings of C-482 Application.
Though on taking of cognizance an independent
Criminal Case No.614 of 2015 State vs. Sachin
Sethi and others was instituted as against the
present applicants; who are father-in-law and
mother-in-law of respondent no.2, during the
intervening period, the proceedings under Section
13-B of Hindu Marriage Act was drawn before the
Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun being
Matrimonial Case No.816 of 2015 which has been
decreed by the court concerned vide its judgment of
06.04.2016 and the matrimony between them dated
05.12.2012 has been dissolved subject to the
remittance of the permanent alimony amount as
determined by the Principal Judge, Family Court,
Dehradun therein.
It is stated by the counsel for the applicants
that the said amount has already been remitted to
respondent no.2.
In the present C-482 Application, when the
interim order was granted on 04.09.2017 notices
were issued to respondent no.2 and steps were taken
and there is an office report that respondent no.2
has been served with the notices, but still the
respondent no.2 has not put in appearance despite
of there being three reports in that regard, on record
nor has filed any counter affidavit.
It seems so that owing to the quashing of the
proceedings as against the principal accused
persons, the husband, of respondent no.2 and owing
to the fact that the matrimony between them has
already been dissolved under Section 13-B of the
Hindu Marriage Act, the respondent no.2 despite of
service of notice, since has lost her interest to
pursue the matter and is not presenting herself
before this Court, in that eventuality, keeping the lis
pending would be nothing but causing harassment
to the applicants herein who are the senior citizens
of above 75 years of age.
Owing to the fact that C-482 Application is
not being contested by the private respondent no.2
who is the principal aggrieved person and no
counter affidavit has been filed by her, on her
behalf, the C-482 Application is allowed. As a
consequence thereto, the proceedings of Criminal
Case No.614 of 2015 State vs. Sachin Sethi and
others would hereby stand quashed qua the present
applicants too.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.)
06.12.2022
Arti
