IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (C-482) No. 585 of 2008 With Stay Vacation Application No. 385 of 2010 Interim Relief Application No. 13 of 2011 1. Islamuddin S/o Late Shri Hisamuddin 2. Smt. Chand Bee W/o Islamuddin 3. Naimuddin S/o Late Shri Hismauddin All R/o Lane No.6, Azad Nagar Haldwani (Nainital). ………………..Applicants Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand Through Secretary in the department of Home Affairs, Dehradun 2. Smt. Mehtab Jahan Divorced wife of Naimuddin D/o Late Murtja Hussain R/o Lane No. 3, Azad Nagar Haldwani (Nainital). ………….Respondents Shri T.A.Khan, Advocate, present for the petitioners Shri P.S.Bohara, Brief Holder, present for the State. None present for respondent no.2. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. 2 By means of this petition, moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceeding of Criminal Case No. 3322 of 2008, State vs. Naimuddin and others, relating to offences punishable under sections 323, 506, 498A I.P.C., Police Station Haldwani, District Nainital, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, District Nainital. (2) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. (3) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that it is grave abuse of process of law on the part of the complainant (respondent no.2) to initiate the criminal proceedings against the petitioners. In this connection it is pointed out that admittedly marriage between respondent no.2 Smt Mehtab Jahan and Naimuddin (petitioner no.3) was solemnized on 19.10.1996. It is also clear from the papers on record that admittedly since 16.03.1997, the respondent no.2 (Smt. Mehtab Jahan) is living in her parental house though she states that she was ousted by her in laws. (4) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that after a period of ten years, the impugned criminal proceedings were initiated by filing the application under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C., to harass the 3 petitioners as the complainant (respondent no.2) was not happy with the fact that the petitioner no.3 was living in a joint family with his brother (petitioner no.1) and sister in law (petitioner no.2). (5) Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners, and after going through the copy of the First Information Report, this court finds that the impugned proceedings are abuse of process of law on the part of respondent no.2,who has complained after a period of ten years that she was harassed for demand of dowry in respect of which she made no complaint earlier to any of the authority. (6) Even the report of the Police Mahila Helpline, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-8 to the present petition, shows that the criminal proceedings have been initiated by the respondent no.2 just to harass her in laws. (7) In the above circumstances, this court finds it to be a fit matter for quashing the proceedings of the criminal case initiated by respondent no.2 against the present petitioners. Accordingly, the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C., is allowed. The proceedings of the Criminal Case No. 3322 of 2008, State vs. Naimuddin and others, relating to offences 4 punishable under sections 323, 506, 498A I.P.C., Police Station Haldwani, District Nainital, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, District Nainital, are hereby quashed. The Stay Vacation Application No. 385 of 2010, and Interim Relief Application No. 13 of 2011 also stand disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt.14.02.2011 N.P