1 / 4 2025:CGHC:4685 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 3088 of 2024 1 - Amzad Khan S/o Late Abdul Rajjak Aged About 40 Years R/o Ward No. 8, Malviyanagar, Khongapani, Police Station- Jhagarakhand, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Lakhanpur, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Reshma Khan W/o Shekh Amjad Khan Aged About 29 Years R/o Lakhanpur, Ward No. 06, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. (Complainant) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Rajbahadur Singh, Advocate For State /Respondent No.1 : Ms. Sunita Sahu, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 27/01/2025 1. The instant petition under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. has been filed against the order dated 04/09/2024 passed in Criminal Case No.3522/2021 passed by the JMFC, Ambikapur, District Surguja, C.G. whereby the charges under Section 498-A IPC have been framed against the petitioner. ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.02.20 10:54:04 +0530 2 / 4 2. The brief facts of the case are that a report was made by the respondent no. 2/complainant alleging that her marriage was solemnized with the petitioner on 30.04.2019 as per the Muslim rites and rituals at Lakhanpur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.). On 01.05.2019 she joined her matrimonial house. On 10.05.2019 she was sent by the petitioner in her parental house against her will with his cousin brother and driver of car which she got as gift from her father. Thereafter, she resided from 10.05.2019 to 28.05.2019 in her parental house and on 28.05.2019 her husband came along with his friend Rahul Vishwakarma and took her to her matrimonial house at Khongapani, Manendragarh. She further contended that her husband took her along with his friend Rahul Vishwkarma at Kullu Manali and they returned from there on 14.06.2019 and on 15.06.2019 the husband of the complainant without her will again left her with his brother Shekh Aslam in her parental house. She further contended that at the instance of her husband she left the job. She further alleged in complaint that her husband did not come for taking her and when she called him he did not receive the call. She further contended that the petitioner/husband of complainant always ignored her and he and his family member had always demanded for dowry and they always abused her for demand of dowry and demanded Rs. 25 lakhs. The respondent no. 2/complainant further alleged that the petitioner / husband and his family members used to harass her and she was ill-treated by them and they have also demanded dowry from her and her parents and she further alleged that the husband and his family 3 / 4 member have not disclosed the fact of earlier marriage of her husband Amjad Khan and pendency of dispute between them. 3. On the basis of the report of the respondent no. 2/complainant the prosecution agency made counseling and after conducting counseling proceeding the FIR was registered in crime no. 49/2021 for offence under section 498 (A), 34 of IPC against the present petitioner and other family members of the petitioner and during the investigation statements of witnesses have been recorded and after completing the investigation the prosecution has filed charge sheet before the JMFC, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.). After filing the charge sheet the learned JMFC has registered the case in Criminal Case No. 3522/2021 and the case was fixed for argument before charge and vide order dated 04.09.2024 the learned court below without found any cogent evidence and material in charge sheet framed the charges under Section 498(A) of IPC against the petitioner. Hence this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegations of demand of dowry are false and frivlous, which would amount to abuse of process of law. He would next contend that Respondent No.2 is a self- employed and she herself do not want to live with the petitioner and in order to obtain the decree of divorce, the false allegations have been leveled. He would next contend that as per the final report there is no allegation of any kind of harrassment or demand of dowry against the petitioner. He would lastly contend that on perusal of the charge-sheet it shows that there is no ingredient of the allege offence against the 4 / 4 petitioner, therefore, the order of framing charge under Section 498-A IPC may be quashed. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that the order of the Court below is well merited which do not call for any interference and the instant petition deserves to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 7. On perusal of the documents it is apparent that the specific allegations have been made by the complainant against the husband for demand of Rs.25.00 Lakhs as dowry and also harassing the victim, therefore, prima facie case is made out against the petitioner under Section 498 (A) IPC and there is no illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error committed by the trial Court. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to allow this petition. 8. Accordingly, the instant petition being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu