IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 998 of 2007
Smt. Sandhya Devi ... ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand and Others Opp. Parties
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR
............
For the Petitioner : M/s Lukesh Kumar, Satish Kumar Keshri
For the State : Mr. S.K. Srivastava, (A.P.P.)
For O.P. Nos.( 2,3 & 4) M/s K.P. Deo, Girish Mohan Singh
ORDER
13/30.08.2011
This revision is directed against the order dated
13.03.2007, passed by Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dumka in
P.C.R. Case No. 158 of 2006 whereby he dismissed the complaint
under Section 203 of the Cr. P.C.
It is alleged in the complaint petition that on 04.04.2006,
all accused persons came to the house of complainant and forcibly
took away Sudha Rani in absence of her husband. It appears that
complainant and his witnesses supported aforesaid fact during enquiry
under Section 202 of the Cr. P.C. But learned court below held that no
offence made out against accused persons, accordingly, complaint
was dismissed by impugned order.
From perusal of impugned order I find that there is no
material to show that Sudha Rani went to her parental house out of her
own free will. There is also no material to show that consent of Sudha
Rani’s husband was obtained before taking her to her parental house.
There is specific allegation in the complaint petition as well as in the
statement of complainant on S.A. that accused persons forcibly took
away Sudha Rani from her inlaw’s house. Thus prima-facie offences
as enumerated in complaint petition is made out against accused
persons.
In that view of the matter, impugned order cannot be
sustained. Accordingly, same is hereby set aside. Learned Court
below is directed to pass order in accordance with law.
(Prashant Kumar, J.)
Binit