A Pune Techie Lands In The 498A Morass Of Her Creation

my woes and pains which I suffered becoze of the false case. A Pune techie tried to lodge a false 498a case against her husband & in laws at Police Post: Aundh of PS: Chaturshringhi Pune on 17/06/08 around 1.30pm but as per the police it was prima facie a minor tut u mein mein between the husband & wife & recorded the complaint U/s 323 IPC in which it was clearly mentioned that she does not want to go for any medical examination. Frustrated by Police inaction, she immediately left for her native place by train and lodged an FIR on 18/6/08 evening U/s 498a/506/323 IPC read with Section 3&4 of Dowry Prohibition Act against her husband & in-laws, using her family influence. A Medical examination was also got done, in which it is alleged that she was beaten by her husband on the night of 15th June by lathi & buts of hands and has pain in head, neck, back hand, legs cheeks etc with difficulty in walking & diminishing vision. Surprisingly the CMO prescribed only a tablet of Brufen for all the above narrated injuries. She was also referred to Eye Specialist and Orthopedics specialist but she did not visit them. Later the FIR was transferred to Pune because of Jurisdiction and a fresh FIR No: 297/08 was registered at PS: Chaturshringhi Pune taking the FIR No: 0 as a gospel truth. Here a few questions arise: 1. If she was really beaten on the night of 15th, why she did not contact the Police on 16th of June and attended her office for the whole day ? 2. If she was beaten by husband, why she had not gone to hospital for treatment at Pune, while it is a well known fact that Pune has better medical facilities than any other city in the Western & Central India. 3. If she was really beaten in Pune, why she went to her native place 900 kms away to register an FIR followed by medical treatment. 4. Can a lady with difficulty in walking and diminishing vision afford to travel 900 kms. by train. 5. Can a lady with diminishing vision afford to wait for medical treatment for three days only because her FIR is not yet registered and the Police had not sent her to the hospital ? In the First three lines of the said FIR, she emphasized that her father gave all kinds of dowry articles as per his capacity in her marriage. And as a witness, five of her family members in a bid to help strengthen her false 498a case, recorded their statements before the Police that sufficient dowry was given in the marriage. While out of these five, two are Government servants and forgot their first &

foremost duty to inform the Law Enforcing Agency/ Police, if dowry was being given in the marriage, which is a crime against society. It is pertinent to mention that Departmental disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against both of them for attending a marriage where dowry was given, as well as for going to Pune as a Witness in a criminal case inquiry without taking approval of its higher authorities and for going out of state without any sanction of leave & permission to leave the headquarter. That for her own statements before Police & in FIR, affidavit in Session Court, her divorce petition and statements of the family members U/s: 161 before the Police, categorically mentioning that dowry was given in the marriage, a case U/s: 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act (DP-3) had been registered against the Techie & all the five family members for giving dowry and abetment to giving dowry on the order of Ld. JMFC Court No: 9 Pune on 14th Nov 2009. That also in order to strengthen her false 498a case against her husband and in-laws, the Techie hacked E. mail accounts of her husband & father-in-law number of times and took out prints using office system, internet and printing facility, while being a Software Engineer she can-not be treated as innocent about Cyber Laws in the Country and for which a case under IT Act 2000 is registered at Mumbai. In which, she had filed her reply accepting that she has accessed these e. mail accounts to collect proofs against her husband & in-laws using office system, internet & printing facility which clearly place equal responsibility as per Section 43A of the IT Act 2000 on the Employer for allowing misuse of its system. Later in her DP-3 case, she and her parents applied for anticipatory bail on 12/3/10 which had not been granted yet because the Police has to recover all the Dowry articles which she alleged to have been given in the marriage by her parents and is now a case property. Since they have mentioned in their bail application that they have not committed any such crime as has been alleged in the FIR U/s: DP-3, it may invite another perjury case against the Techie & her family for registering false case. Meanwhile the Techie, her father & Mother had been implicated in another criminal case for Perjury for submitting a false affidavit in the Court of Ld. Addl. Session Judge Pune U/s: 174, 177, 181, 191, 192, 196, 193 IPC and also U/S 340 CR. P.C. in which she has no escape. Here it is for sure that the Techie & her family is caught in the cobweb woven by themselves against her husband & in-laws with no escape what so ever. ____________________________________