IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL C-482 NO. 795 OF 2007 Hakim Singh and others. ……Applicants. Versus Judicial Magistrate, Khatima and another. ….Opposite Parties. Present: Mr. Tumul Nailwal, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. P.S. Bohara, AGA for the State of Uttarakhand. Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. It is pertinent to note that none stands on behalf of opposite party no. 2 Tulsi Devi, so learned AGA has been heard on her behalf and this Court has given hearing to learned counsel for the applicants too. 2. By way of this petition, moved under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the order of cognizance dated 7.7.2007 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Khatima in Crimnal Case No. 983 of 2007 Smt. Tulsi Vs. Sri Hakim Singh and others is under challenge. 3. In brief, the facts are that Smt. Tulsi Devi tied her nuptial knot on 21.9.2006 with Sri Hakim Singh. Just after couple of months, having passed the blissful wedding life, differences cropped up between the two and it is alleged that Sri Hakim Singh (husband) along with other petitioners commenced to adopt atrocious attitude towards Smt. Tulsi Devi commenting and taunting on the question of dowry, which was allegedly not offered by her parents to the expectation of the petitioners. They started to raise the demand of `10,000/- along with motor cycle and a gold chain. It should also be noted that Sri Shivraj Singh is the father of the groom, Sri Hari Singh and Sri Bharat Singh are the brothers of the groom and Smt. Savitri is the mother of groom and Smt. Lata is the wife of 2 Sri Hari Singh. Thus, all the petitioners are close relatives and part of the same family. 4. On 1.5.2007, the elder sister and mother of Smt. Tulsi Devi came to her in-laws house. They persuaded the petitioners, but in vain, so Smt. Tulsi Devi made up her mind to leave her matrimonial house on 2.5.2007 along with her elder sister and mother, but she was beaten by all the petitioners confining her in a room. When the elder sister and mother tried to rescue Smt. Tulsi Devi, they also met the same fate. 5. Any how she could leave her matrimonial home and came to her parents’ house. 6. On 3.5.2007, she lodged a report in the Police Station Khatima along with medical examination, but the police did not take any action. 7. Further on 21.5.2007 at about 10:00 a.m., all the petitioners came to her parents’ house. No sooner did they enter into the house, they started to hurl abuses with all adjectives along with beating her by kicks and fists. At the same time, they were also demanding `10,000/-, motor cycle and gold chain. Hearing the hue and cry, neighbours Mahendra Singh, Arif and others assembled there. 8. Smt. Tulsi Devi filed the above complaint No. 983 of 2007 on 2.6.2007, and after recording the statement of the complainant and her witnesses Mohd. Quasim and Mahendra Singh, learned Magistrate passed the order of cognizance asking all the petitioners to stand trial for offence of Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court towards a report of Re-conciliation Cell, which discloses that after the attempt of re- conciliation, Smt. Tulsi Devi refused to accompany her 3 husband, and no allegation of demand of dowry and cruelty was found. 10. He also argued that on 12.6.2007, an application was sent by Sri Hakim Singh to Senior Superintendent of Police expressing the apprehension that he may be implicated in some false case by his wife Smt. Tulsi Devi. 11. Having heard the learned counsel of the petitioners and learned AGA, this Court does not find any element of credence in the incident, which allegedly took place on 21.5.2007 at the parental house of Smt. Tulsi Devi. Although the report of the Re-conciliation Cell is also not of much help to him because it is not conclusive and the veracity of the findings is yet to be decided and determined during the trial. It appears that the complaint entails an exaggerated version implicating all the family members of the husband aforestated just to oppress them. This Court, while finding it to be a fit case to quash the order of cognizance against petitioner nos. 2 to 6, at the same time, it is not inclined to pass similar order for Sri Hakim Singh. 12. In view of the above, the order of cognizance as well as the complaint against Sri Shivraj Singh, Sri Hari Singh, Sri Bharat Singh, Smt. Savitri Devi and Smt. Lata is hereby quashed, while the order of cognizance as well as the complaint against Sri Hakim Singh is left alive with the direction to proceed the matter ahead. Let a copy of this order be remitted to the court below. Stay order passed by this Court on 27.10.2007 is hereby vacated. 13. The petition is partly allowed. (Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) 12.10.2011 Rathour