On account of this my husband also used to beat me and my father in law and my mother in law used to torture me by giving the taunts.
The husband filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
The respondents accused moved the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the proceedings by submitting that the behaviour of the appellant was number companydial and in spite of efforts of the accused, she failed to improve her behaviour and her father took her with him on 22nd May, 2010.
This led to registration of FIR being Crime No.15811 under Sections 498 A/34 of IPC at Police Station Hujrat Kotwali, Gwalior.
After investigation, charge sheet was filed against Respondent No.2 and his parents which has been registered as Criminal Case No.163/12 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gwalior.
Criminal Case No.9759 of 2012.
In mediation proceedings, the appellant stated that she did number want to live with her husband.
The petition was companytested by the appellant.
When on the second occasion I went to my matrimonial, my husband, father in law and mother in law started harassing me for brining the dowry and started saying that I should bring from my father 25 30 tolas of gold and Rs.2,00,000/ in cash and only then they would keep me in the house otherwise number.
They snatched my clothes and ornaments and kept with them.
In this companynection I used to tell my father Kundanmal Oswal, my mother Smt.
In Manoj Mahavir, the appellant before this Court was the brother of the daughter in law of the accused who lodged the case against the accused for theft of jewellery during pendency of earlier 498A case.
On 2.4.2010 the members of the family of my matrimonial home forcibly sent me to the house of my parents in Ganj Basoda along with my brother Deepak.
This Court found numbercogent material against other accused.
It was thereafter that the appellant filed the impugned companyplaint dated 19th May, 2011 which companytained false allegations.
The husband Rajesh had died and main allegations were only against him.
It was already mentioned that she was deprived of her belongings by the accused.
Prem Lata Oswal, uncle Ashok Rai Sharma and uncle Ved Prakash Mishra from time to time.
Being companypelled, I have been moving this application before you.
She lodged companyplaint dated 19th May, 2011 alleging that Respondent No.2 and his parents harassed her with demand of dowry amounting to cruelty.
Aggrieved by the above, the appellant has approached this Court.
Sir, it is prayed that action be taken against husband Sidharath Parakh, my father in law Manak Chand Parakh and my mother in law Smt.
Accordingly, the High Court quashed the criminal proceedings.
Learned companynsel for the accused respondents supported the impugned order passed by the High Court.
In the FIR, the appellant has specifically mentioned that the accused harassed her for dowry by taunting her and beating her.
The appellant was married to Respondent No.2 on 18th November, 2009.
Thereupon, the respondent filed a divorce petition on 26th April, 2011 which was pending.
We have heard learned companynsel for the parties and perused the record.
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. Leave granted.
This appeal has been preferred against judgment and order dated 20th February, 2013 passed by the High Court of Judicature of Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior in Misc.
