AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Initially a crime was registered on the allegation of offence under Section 420, 34 IPC, against the accused persons. After investigation a refer
report was submitted under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. finding that the case would not fall under Section 170 of the Cr.P.C. Thereon, on receipt of
notice, the defacto complainant filed a protest complaint, over which, the learned Magistrate took cognizances without applying his mind properly and
decided to issue process to the accused persons, against which, the accused - the wife of defacto complainant, her father and uncle came up under
Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Prima facie it appears that, what is involved is a breach of an obligation/ settlement arrived at by the parties - the husband and wife and the near
relatives. By virtue of the alleged settlement some of the property belonged to the defacto complainant-husband was transferred in the name of wife,
the accused No.1, based on a promise made by the accused No.1 that she would execute and sign a joint application under Section 13B of the Hindu
Marriage Act, so as to get a divorce by mutual consent. Later on, she retracted from the promise and that has resulted in the registration of the crime
and a second complaint by way of protest complaint.
Going by the nature of the case involved, it is clear that what is involved is only a breach of an obligation arising out of a settlement/contract
between the parties to a marriage and it will not attract either the ingredient which would constitute cheating as defined under Section 415 of IPC or
the offence under Section 420 IPC. If it is proceeded, it would be an abuse of process of the Court. The F.I.R and further proceedings are liable to be
quashed. I do so.
The Crl.M.C. is allowed accordingly.