Criminal Misc. No.M.29795 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M.29795 of 2009 Date of decision 6.10.2010. Inderjit Kaur ...... Petitioner. versus State of Punjab and another. CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.C.PURI. Present : Mr. A.S.Cheema, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sudhir Nehra, Addl.A.G.Punjab for respondent No.1. Mr. Kuldeep Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. K.C.PURI, J. Inderjit Kaur petitioner-accused has directed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short – Cr.P.C. ) for quashing FIR No.39 dated 9.6.2009 Police Station Sadar Mansa, District Mansa under Sections 498-A, 406 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (in short – the IPC ) and all subsequent proceedings arising thereto qua the petitioner being illegal, wrong and misuse of the process of law. The brief facts of the case are that the marriage of the Criminal Misc. No.M.29795 of 2009 2 complainant-respondent No.2 with Jagjit Singh brother of the petitioner was performed in February 2004, which was a simple marriage whereas the petitioner got married much earlier in the year 2001 and since then she is residing at her in-laws house at village Bhaini Bhagha, which is away from the in-laws house of the complainant and she has no interference in the married life of respondent No.2-complainant and her husband Jagjit Singh. The petitioner is respectable, peace loving and law abiding citizen and she is the married sister-in-law (nanad) of the complainant Paramjeet Kaur and she has been falsely implicated in the above said FIR by the complainant just to harass and humiliate her. She has no interference in the married life of respondent No.2-complainant and her husband Jagjit Singh. It has been further alleged that all the allegations against the petitioner are general and vague in nature and from the contents of the FIR, no offence is made out against the petitioner. The petitioner is living a settled life with her husband and children at her in-laws house far away from the respondent No.2- complainant and her husband (brother of the petitioner) and she has nothing to do with the married life of the respondent/complainant and her husband Jagjit Singh. The lodging of the FIR after about five years of the marriage with no previous history of any such allegations shows that the story is concocted and allegations are patently false. On notice, respondent No.1 appeared and filed written reply by way of affidavit of Amarjeet Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division, Mansa, on behalf of respondent No.1 and took up preliminary objections that the DSP Mansa conducted an inquiry and found that the allegations levelled in the application were correct and thereafter on the Criminal Misc. No.M.29795 of 2009 3 directions of Senior Superintendent of Police, Mansa the impugned FIR was registered against the accused persons. The challan has already been presented before the trial Court on 13.10.2009 and fixed for consideration for charge on 18.1.2010. Denying other averments, they prayed for dismissal of the petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. The petitioner is the married sister-in-law of the complainant Paramajit Kaur. It is not disputed that marriage of petitioner had taken place prior to the marriage of Paramjit Kaur with Jagjit Singh, brother of the petitioner. The precise allegation in the complaint is that petitioner is married at Bhaini Bhagha and usually come at village Buraj Rathi and whenever she came and she used to get the complainant beaten from her mother-in-law and husband. No specific instance for extorting the petitioner to mother-in-law and husband of the complainant to beat the complaint has been given in the First Information Report. General and vague allegations have been made. The other allegations against the petitioner is that one ring weighing half tola, one chain weighing one tola and Rs.50,000/- out of the amount meant for car was given to the petitioner by mother-in-law of the complainant. No recovery of any article has been effected from the petitioner. During investigation also the petitioner was found to be innocent. There is a tendency to implicate all the family members in a dowry case. This Court in authority Jasbir Kaur and anr. vs. The State of Haryana and anr. 1990 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 243 held that an Criminal Misc. No.M.29795 of 2009 4 estranged wife will go to any extent to rope in as many relations of husband as possible in a desperate effort to salvage. The prosecution against sisters was quashed in the said judgment. Again in authority Ramandeep Kaur vs. State of Punjab 2001(4) R.C.R.(Criminal) 394 FIR against all accused persons except husband and his parents was quashed, wherein allegations qua them were vague and they had no concern with demand of dowry or cruelty. In authority Kamaljit Singh vs. State of Punjab 2004(1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 321, this Court exercised the jurisdiction of quashing in respect of married sisters. Similar view was taken in Divya alias Babli and others vs. State of Haryana and another 2006(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 322. So, keeping in view whole of the circumstances, the petition under Section 482 stands accepted. The FIR No.39 dated 9.6.2009 under Sections 498-A, 406 and 201 of the IPC registered at Police Station Sadar Mansa, District Mansa qua petitioner, who happened to be the married sister of the husband of the complainant, stands quashed. Further proceedings pursuant to the said FIR also stands quashed. However, the trial Court shall proceed expeditiously against the remaining accused. A copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court for strict compliance. ( K.C.PURI ) JUDGE October 06, 2010 sv