Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2007 (12) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2007 (12) TMI 506 - SC - Indian LawsDowry - harassment and demand of ₹ 50,000/- and V.C.R. - Commission of Offences u/s 498A, 406/34 of the Indian Penal Code (‘I.P.C.’) - Application to Quash the charge sheet and the consequential proceedings arising out of First Information Report (FIR) - Appellants No. 1, 2 and 3 are respectively the father-in-law, sister-in-law and the husband of the complainant - HELD THAT:- In the present case, from a plain reading of the complaint filed by the complainant, it is clear that the facts mentioned in the complaint, taken on their face value, do not make out a prima facie case against the appellants for having dishonestly misappropriated the Stridhan of the complainant, allegedly handed over to them, thereby committing criminal breach of trust punishable under Section 406 I.P.C. Furthermore, it is also noted in the charge-sheet itself that the complainant had refused to take articles back when this offer was made to her by the Investigating Officer. Therefore, in our opinion, the very pre- requisite of entrustment of the property and its misappropriation by the appellants are lacking in the instant case. We have no hesitation in holding that the learned Additional Sessions Judge and the High Court erred in law in coming to the conclusion that a case for framing of charge under Section 406 I.P.C. was made out. As regards the applicability of Section 498A I.P.C., We are convinced that the allegation of misbehaviour on the part of appellant Nos.1 and 2 and the demand of ₹ 50,000/- and V.C.R. by them made by the complainant in her subsequent statement, was an after thought and not bona fide. Having carefully glanced through the complaint, the F.I.R. and the charge-sheet, we find that charge under Section 498A I.P.C. is not brought home insofar as appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are concerned. Consequently, we allow the appeal partly; quash the charge framed against all the appellants under Section 406 I.P.C. quash the charge framed against appellant Nos. 1 and 2 under Section 498A I.P.C. and dismiss the appeal of appellant No. 3 against framing of charge under Section 498A I.P.C. Needless to add that the trial court shall now proceed with the trial untrammeled by any observation made by the Additional Sessions Judge and upheld by the High Court in the impugned order or by us in this judgment.
|