Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
SMT. ANITA AND ORS. MRS. MOHINI @ JYOTI
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/04/1997
BENCH:
M.K. MUKHERJEE, S.P. KURDUKAR
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
W I T H
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 401 OF 1997
(arising out of special leave petition (crl.) No. 1195
of 1997)
J U D G M E N T
S.P. KURDUKAR, J.
Leave granted.
2. These two criminal appeals arise out of an order dated
8th July, 1996 in C.R. No. 159 of 1996 passed by the High
court of Madhya Pradesh, Indore Bench and , Therefore, they
are being disposed of by this judgment.
3. One Raj Kumar son of Siri Chand was married to Deep @
Sonia (since deceased ) on 15th February, 1994. On June 1,
1994, Deepa alleged to have committed suicide and died due
to asphyxia. On the very same day, Mohini @ Jyoti the
mother of Deepa lodged a complaint with the police station
Juni, Indore alleging harassment to her daughter and demand
of dowry. An F.I.R was lodged against Siri Chand Bajaj,
Naresh Bajaj, Kavita, Mohan, Meera Usha, Anita, Raj Kumar
and krishna @ Pushpa. It is alleged in the complaint that
the nine accuse persons who are members of the in-laws’
family of Deepa were harassing and torturing her (Deepa) for
bringing a car and gifts in dowry. it is because of this
harassment Deepa hanged herself and as a result thereof,
where died due to asphyxia. it is further alleged in the
complaint that all these accused persons have committed an
offence punishable under sections 304-B/498A/34 of the
Indian penal code. After completing the investigation, a
charge sheet came to be filed against these accused person
in the court of C.J.M , Indore, who committed the case to
the court of session for trial. The XIth Add1. Session case
no. 97 of 1995 framed charged on 10th April, 1996 against
all the accused for offences punishable under section 304-B,
498A/34 of the Indian penal code. Except Raj Kumar son of
Siri Chand, remaining eight accused persons filed revision
petition before the High court against the order of framing
of charges. The learned single Judge of the High court vide
its judgment and order dated 28th July, 1996 held that the
charge framed against all the accused persons except Siri
Chand Bajaj (father-in-law of Deepa) did not suffer from any
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
illegality. consequently, the High court quashed the charge
against Siri Chand son of Nagu Mal and directed the trial
court to proceed against other accused persons in accordance
with law. It is against this order passed by the High court
seven petitioners filed the special Leave petition before
this court. This court vide its order dated 2nd December,
1996 dismissed the special Leave petition of fort accused
persons namely Naresh Bajaj, Mohini Bajaj, Chand Bajaj,
Kavita Bajaj and Pushpa Bajaj. However, notice was issued in
respect of three petitioners, namely Anita w/o Vasudev
Vathwani, Usha w/o Gopal Vachwani and Meera W/o Ramesh Bajaj
(petitioners Nos. 5, 6 and 7).
4. Smt. Mohini @ Jyoti the mother of Deepa @ Sonia has
also filed a S.L.P against the order of the High court dated
28th July, 1996 whereby the charge against Siri Chand s/o
Nagu Mal (the father-in-law of Deepa) was quashed. there is
delay in filing SLP and it is condoned. This is how both
these appeals arise out of the order dated 28th July, 1996
passed by the High court .
5. We heard the learned counsel for the parties as also
the standing counsel for the state of Madhya Pradesh. We
have very carefully perused the record and on such perusal,
we are of the considered view that the materials appearing
thereon is not sufficient for proceeding against these
appellants for the charge framed against them under section
304-B, 498A/34 of the Indian penal code. Resultantly, Usha
w/o Gopal Vachwani and Meera w/o Ramesh Bajaj shall stand
discharged.
6. Coming to criminal Appeal filed by Smt. Mohini @ Jyoti
we are of the option that the learned High court has
committed no error in quashing the charge against Siri Chand
S/o Nagu Mal Bajaj, the father-in-low of Deepa.
7. In the result, the criminal Appeal filed by the
appellants Anita. Usha and Meera is allowed and the order
passed by the courts below framing charge against them is
quashed and set aside and they are discharged. criminal
appeal filed by Smt. Mohini is dismissed.