LexSAMIRA KHANUM versus MD. AFSAR TOWHEED AND ANR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2009] 4 S C.R. 112 SAMIRA KHANUM v MD. AFSAR TOWHEED AND ANR Criminal Appeal No. 450 of 2009 MARCH 6. 2009 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, JJ.] Code of Criminal Procedure. 1973 - s.482 - Complaint u/ss. 498-A and 406 IPC and ulss. 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition C Act - Application for quashing the proceedings - Allowed by High Court- On appeal, held: High Court order passed without indicating any basis or reason for exercising jurisdiction under the provision - Matter remitted to High Court for consideration afresh - Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 498-A and 406 - Dowry D Prohibition Act. 1961 - ss. 3 and 4. Appellant filed a complaint case u/ss. 498-A and 406 IPC and u/ss. 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Directions were given to summon the respondents. E Respondent No.1 filed application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. and the same was allowed. Hence the present appeal. Allowing the appeal and remitting the matter to High Court, the Court HELD : The High Court has not indicated any basis F or reason for exercising jurisdiction u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. The application was disposed of in a casual manner. Therefore, the order of the High Court is clearly indefensible and is, accordingly, set aside. G State of Haryana and Ors. v. Bhajanlal and Ors. 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 - referred to. H Case Law Reference 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 Referred to. Para 4 112 • .... SAMIRA KHANUM V. MD. AFSAR TOWHEED AND ANR 113 CRIMINALAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal A No. 450 of 2009 From the Judgement and Order dated 28.08.2006 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Misc. Application No. 32326 of 2005. Ejaz Maqbool, for the Appellant. Altaf Ahmad, T.A. Khan, Gaurav Agrawal, Gopal Singh, Manish Kumar, for the Respondents. The Judgement of the Court was delivered by DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted. B c 2. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by the learned Single Judge of the Patna High Court allowing the D application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the 'Code'). Prayer was made by the respondent no.1 to quash the order dated 30.11.2004 passed by learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna, in Complaint Case No.2523(C)/2004, whereby direction was given E to issue summons against the respondent no.1 and others for facing trial for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC') and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (in short 'D.P. Act'). F 3. The factual position in a nutshell is as follows : The case of the complainant (O.P. No.2) is that she was married to the respondent no.1 on 24.10.1999 at Patna according to the Muslim Law. The other two accused are his G father and mother. After marriage, on the same day she went to her matrimonial house. At the time of marriage several articles, ornaments, cash etc. amounting to Rs.5 lacs were given as gift. The respondent no.1 and his parents were not happy with the same and wanted more dowry. The parents of the respondent H 114 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 4 S.C.R. A no.1, taunted her for insufficient dowry. After 15 days of the marriage, the respondent no.1 went to America where he was doing a job of Software Engineer and in the meantime the complainant on 9.11.1999 returned to her parental house as the parents of the respondent no.1 compelled her to leave the B matrimonial house by their misbehaviour and cruel attitude. Respondent no.1 thereafter sent a visa to the complainant and the complainant went to America on 18.4.2000. There she found her husband having illicit relationship with an American girl named "Dolly". She seriously objected to this relationship. The C respondent no.1 told her that in America it was status symbol to have a girl friend and he demoralized her saying that she belongs to an orthodox and backward family. The complainant anyhow stayed there for about a year and returned to India with the respondent no.1 on 19.8.2001. During their stay at Patna her D parents tried to convince the husband to refrain from such relationship with another for cordial conjugal life. He promised to mend himself. Both of them again went to U.S.A. after staying for five weeks in Patna. During this stay all the accused persons asked the complainant to bring Rs.1.2 lacs from her parents for E purchase of a flat in the name of complainant h
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.