IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-2337 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision : 14.12.2011. Balkar Singh & others ...... Petitioners Versus State of Haryana & another ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr. P.S. Jammu, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Satyavir Yadav, DAG, Haryana. Mr. M.P.S. Mann, Advocate, for respondent No.2. NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL) Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of First Information Report No.161 dated July 9th, 2010 under Sections 406, 494, 498-A, 504 and 506/120-B of Indian Penal Code registered in Police Station Sadar Dabwali, District Sirsa. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that he does not press the petition on behalf of Balkar Singh, Smt Rani alias Balbir Kaur and Baldev Singh-petitioners No.1 to 3 respectively because they have been found innocent and charge sheet against them has not been filed by the prosecution. In view of this, petition filed on their behalf is dismissed as withdrawn. 3. Now, before this Court, Hardeep Singh is the only petitioner. Aforesaid FIR was registered on the statement of Jasbir Kaur who was married with Darshan Singh in the year 1992. A daughter was born out of the wedlock who is now aged about 18 years. Darshan Singh-husband, Jasmail Kaur mother-in-law, Sukhpal Kaur, Malkiat Singh and Hardeep Singh-petitioner are facing trial. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that in the FIR, no allegation whatsoever was levelled against the Criminal Misc. No. M-2337 of 2011 (2) petitioner that he ever treated the complainant with cruelty or subjected her to harassment on account of demand for dowry. The only allegation against the petitioner, who is maternal uncle of Darshan Singh and has retired as a Police Officer, is that he threatened the complainant party that he being an Ex-Police officer knows the law. Except this, there is no other allegation against the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the state and the complainant could not show any material evidence to prove that at any point of time, the petitioner subjected the complainant to cruelty on account of demand for dowry. 6. In view of this, petition is accepted. Consequently, FIR No.161 dated July 9th, 2010 under Sections 406, 494, 498-A, 504 and 506/120-B of Indian Penal Code registered in Police Station Sadar Dabwali, District Sirsa and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua Hardeep Singh-petitioner. (NAWAB SINGH) JUDGE 14.12.2011. SN