IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No.264 of 2006 (U/s 482 Cr.P.C.) Ishtiaq & others ……. Petitioners Versus State of Uttaranchal & another ..…. Respondents Dated: March 27, 2012 Sri Pradeep Chamiyal, Advocate i/b Sri Siddharth Sah, Adv. for the petitioners Sri P.S. Bohara, Brief Holder for the State/respondent no.1 None for respondent no.2 though service upon her is sufficient Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta , J. The petition has been filed in the Court seeking to quash the criminal complaint case no.418 of 2006, Smt. Farida Vs. Ishtiaq & others, and the order of cognizance dated 22.3.2006 as well, passed therein against all the petitioners. The marriage of Smt. Farida (resident of Roorkee, Distt. Haridwar) was solemnized on 7.6.1998 with Sri Ishtiaq (resident of Distt. Muzaffarnagar). In the matrimonial house, she passed a couple of months peacefully but soon the relations between the families duo became acrimonious on the question of dowry and it is alleged that all the family members, who are petitioners before this Court, commenced to raise a demand of Rs.1.00 lakh in cash and a motorcycle, failing which a series of atrocities and cruel conduct was observed towards Smt. Farida. Ultimately, she was constrained to leave the matrimonial house and to reside with her brother Nasir in Roorkee since 14.11.2005. She filed the instant complaint and examined before the Magistrate herself u/s 200 Cr.P.C. whereas, her witnesses PW1 Nasir and PW2 Gulsannawar were examined u/s 202 Cr.P.C. Learned Magistrate took cognizance of the matter and asked all the petitioners to stand 2 trial for the offences u/s 498-A/452/352/504/506 IPC r/w Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. It has been contended, on behalf of petitioners, that prior to filing of this complaint, Ishtiyaq (husband) filed a petition no.442/2005 u/s 9 of Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights on 3.12.2005 in Muzaffarnagar court. It was further submitted that the husband lives quite separate from other family members. All the more, Smt. Nusrat (sister-in- law) is married one and lives in Bhopal and she has been falsely implicated and roped along with other petitioners. Having gone through all the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court is convinced only to this extent that Smt. Nusrat should be discharged from the case. However, there are, prima facie, specific allegations against rest of the petitioners which are specific for taking cognizance against them. In view of the above, the petition is partly allowed. Impugned complaint, as also the order of cognizance, so far as it relates to petitioner Smt. Nusrat only, are hereby quashed, whereas, the complaint, along with the cognizance order, is left sustained against rest of the petitioners. Interim order dated 25.4.2006, granted by this Court, is vacated accordingly. Inform the court below. (Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) March 27, 2012 Rajeev Dang