Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 16, 2010 Harbans Singh ........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab & another ........Respondents ****** CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Hemender Goswami, Advocate, for the petitioner. SABINA, J. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the criminal complaint No.478/2/09 dated 20.5.2009, under Sections 406,498-A,323,504,506 of Indian Penal Code, pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jalandhar as well as the summoning order dated 3.2.2010, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jalandhar. The contents of the complaint (Annexure P-1) read as under :- “That the complainant is the legally wedded wife of the accused no.1 and their marriage was solemnized on 6.11.2004 as per Hindu Religious Rites and Ceremonies and the said marriage still subsists. 2. That the accused no.1 is that husband of the complainant, accused no.2 is father in law of complainant, accused no.3 is paternal aunt i.e. sister of accused no.2, Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 2 whereas accused no.4 is the daughter of accused no.3. All the above named accused persons have attended the marriage of the complainant and participated in the said marriage. 3. That after the marriage, the complainant and the accused no.1 lived and cohabited with each other as husband and wife at Ludhiana and from the wedlock two children namely Gurkirat Kaur alias Kirti (DOB 1.7.2006) and Devinder Singh alias Devinder (DOB 7.6.2008) were born to the complainant from the loins of the accused no.1. At present the complainant, along with her said minor children, is residing with her paternal house at Bhargo Camp, Jalandhar City and they have passing their hard days at the mercy of the parents of complainant, because the respondent has neglected and deserted the complainant along with her minor children with utmost cruelty. The accused no.1 has forced the complainant along with her minor children to leave her matrimonial home, for the reason that the complainant could not fulfill the illegal demands of the above named accused persons, in respect of more dowry articles, cash Rs.30,0,000/- and Hero Honda Motor Cycle. 4. That, however, it is worthwhile to mention here that after the marriage, the complainant was treated in normal way only for some period and thereafter the accused no.1 at the instance of accused no.2 to 4 started maltreating and torturing the complainant on account of less dowry articles, cash worth Rs.3,00,000/- and Hero Honda Motor Cycle. The accused no.3 Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 3 and 4 always remained interfering into peaceful married life of the complainant. 5. That infact the parents of the complainant had given sufficient dowry articles (along with jewelry gold and silver) and other valuable clothes and other luxurious items, as per the demands of the above named accused persons, in the said marriage and the same were entrusted to the above named accused persons, in the presence of respectables, relations and relatives. The accused person further stated that whatever the dowry articles were given to them, those were of inferior quality and were not upto their standard and expectations. All the accused persons had been pressurizing the complainant to bring more dowry articles, cash Rs.3,00,000/- along with Hero Honda motorcycle as the accused no.1 intends to increase his business, to which the complainant showed her inability by making request to them that her parents have already spent a huge amount at her marriage, so they are not in position to meet the above said illegal demands of the accused persons, with regard to more dowry articles, cash Rs.3,00,000/- and Hero Honda motorcycle, but the accused persons were not satisfied with the request of the complainant, on which the persons became annoyed and started giving beatings to the complainant by the accused no.1 under the influence of the liquor at the instance of the accused no.2 to 4. The accused no.1 is a habitual drinker and addicted to all bad vices and even the complainant had been turned out 4-5 occasion, from her Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 4 matrimonial house by above named accused persons after giving severe beatings to her. The complainant was got rehabilitated by her parents by convening panchayats members namely Shri Des Raj s/o Shri Lachhman Dass r/o Sant Nagar, Basti Sheikh, Jalandhar, Ram Lubhaya son of Bihari Lal r/o H.No. 1279 New Surajganj, Jalandhar and Shri Dev Raj s/o Sh. Gian Chand r/o H.No.1584, Bhargo Camp, Jalandhar and others. 6. That it is pertinent to mention here that at the time of marriage, the sufficient dowry articles and valuable gifts were given to all the accused persons as per their demands by the parents of the complainant, which were only for exclusive and absolute use of the complainant herself in her matrimonial home being her istridhan, having been handed over and delivered to all the above named accused persons as a trust property of the complainant. The detail of the dory articles (istridhan) which were entrusted to the accused persons are fully mentioned below, which may kindly be read as the part and parcel of the present complaint. The abovesaid articles given at New Surajganj, near Bhargo camp, Jalandhar. 1. Accused No.1 One wrist watch, one gold ring, one gold chain, one gold bracelet, one refrigerator, one coloured television, one steel almirah, one gold karah, 11 gents suits, five safari suits, two pant coats, one pair of shoes Rs.11000/- cash as Shagun. 2. Accused No. 2 Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 5 One gold ring, one blanket, one dining table with six chairs, one double bed with boxes, one pant coat, two gents suits, one cooler, one geizer, one wooden Diwan with pillows, one sofa set with centre table, one gas chulla, one tape recorder, one stereo, one DVD with CD players, one iron peti, trunk, one attachee case, one brief case, one table fan, one ceiling fan, one wall clock, one lunch box steel, five mufflers, etc.etc. 3.Accused No.3 One gold ring, one ladies wrist watch, one sewing machine, one washing machine, 21 ladies sarees, 21 ladies suits, one pirrah, two pieces of ear topus, one pair of ear rings, one gold necklace, 111 utensils, one crockery set, one shikanjavi set, one grinder, one mix, one juicer, two pairs of silver payals, six gold bangles, 11 bed sheets for double beds, one tea set, etc.etc. 4. Accused No.4 One ladies gold ring, 11 daries, 11 pillows, 21 sceneries, 11 table sheets, five quilts, 21 handkeys, one big size blanket, 11 cushions, make up kit, 11 pairs sox ladies and Gents, two pair ladies sandals, one iron press, 11 petticoats, 11 bluses, 21 ladies chunnis, one dinner set, one cooker, sandwich maker, two pillow big sizes, two brass balties, 11 ladies woolen coats, 11 shawls, one gold tikka, one silver keychain, five gold kokkas etc.etc. 7. That the said marriage was solemnized with pomp and show Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 6 on the demand of the accused pesons and huge amount have been spent for the same by the parents of the complainant. 8. That complainant gave birth to a female child on 1.7.2006 but all the accused showed their unhappiness that a female child has taken birth. After the birth of the said female child the behaviour of all the accused persons towards the complainant became very cruel, but the complainant had been tolerated all inhuman behaviour of all the accused persons being Hindu pious lady, with the hope that one day better sense would prevail upon them but all in vain. 9. That the complainant again became pregnant and before the delivery the accused pesons used to warn the complainant not to give birth to a female child. Fortunately on 7.6.23008 the complainant gave birth to a male child and after the birth of second child, the accused person again started raising illegal demands of Rs.3,00,000/ which was not possible to fulfill as the parentes of the complainant were unable to pay such a huge amount of Rs.3,00,000 to the accused as there was a lot of pressure from the accused persons, as such, in the month of august, 2008, the parents of the complainant with great difficulty borrowed Rs.40,000/- and paid to the accused n.1 in the presence of accused no.2 to 4 but they showed their unhappiness and insisted that the demand of Rs.3,00,000/- and Hero Honda motorcycle along with more dowry articles must be met, if the complainant wanted to live happily in her matrimonial home. Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 7 10. That on 15.1.2009 the accused no.1 got some blank papers signed form the complainant asked to disclose the purpose of getting blank papers signed, the accused no.1 started beating the complainant at the instance of the accused no.2 to 4. On the following day, i.e. 16.1.2009 the complainant along with her two minor children were forced to leave her matrimonial home, my the accused persons, as the parents of the complainant could not fulfill the illegal demands of the accused as fully mentioned above. Since then the complainant along with her minor children are residing in the parental house of the complainant. 11. That in the month of February, 2009, the parents of the complainant convened a panchayat consisting the above named respectables and they went to the house of the accused persons at Ludhiana. They requested the accused persons to rehabilitate the complainant along with her minor children in her matrimonial home and further requested them not to raise any kin of demand but they flatly refused to accede to their request. The accused further stated unless, until their above said demands are not fulfilled, in that even there will be no place for the complainant along with her minor children in her matrimonial home. He even a cup of tea was not served by the accused to the said panchayat members, parents of the complainant and the complainant. Ultimately the accused persons flately refused to rehabilitate the complainant along with her minor children. Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 8 12. That in the first week of April, 2009, the complainant along with her parents and the above named respectables, went to the house of the accused at Ludhiana and then again requested the accused to rehabilitate the complainant along with her minor children, in the matrimonial home, but the accused again flatly refused to rehabilitate the complainant along with her minor children, stating unless until their above said demands are not fulfilled, in that event they are not ready and willing to rehabilitate the complainant and her minor children. Finding no way, the complainant along with her minor parents and other respectables requested the above named accused person to return back the dowry articles / istri dhan of the complainant along with her jewelry (gold and silver) etc. etc. But the accused refused to hand over the dowry articles, jewelry etc. to the other complainant, as such they have misappropriated the dowry articles (istri dhan) of the complainant and used the same for their personal use and gain, to which they have got no legal right as the same were/ are exclusively belong to the complainant being her istridhan. Moreover all the dowry articles (istri dhan) along with jewelery and other valuable clothes and luxury items are still in the illegal custody of the accused persons, to which they have no legal rights to do so. 13. That instead of handing over /return back the dowry articles / istri dhan of the complainant, the accused no.1 at the active connivance of accuse dno.2 to 4, have filed a false Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 9 divorce petition against the complainant, which is still pending in the ld. Court of Shri A.S. Narula, Addl. District Judge, Ludhiana and the same is now fixed for 18.7.2009. In the said divorce petition, the complainant has also filed an application for the grant of interim maintenance for herself and for her minor children. The said divorce petition of accused no.1 is likely to be dismissed having no legal force in the eyes of law. 14. That the complainant has also filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against the accused no.1, for the grant of maintenance for herself and on behalf of her minor children, which is also pending in this Hon'ble court and the same is fixed for 22.7.2009. copy of the said divorce petition, along with copy of petition u/s 125 Cr.P.C. are attached herewith for ready reference. Further more the complainant has got no source of income, from any corner in order to maintain herself and for her minor children and further the accuse dno.1 miserably failed to sent a single penny to the complainant in her matrimonial home along with her minor children for their livelihood and further failed to make any efforts to rehabilitate the complainant in her matrimonial home along with her minor children, as such the accused no.1 has deserted and neglected the complainant along with her minor children with utmost cruelty, which increased day by day towards them, entirely on the illegal acts, and conduct of the accused persons. 15. That under the circumstances, as fully mentioned above, all the accused persons have and are misappropriated / Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 10 mis-appropriating the above said dowry articles / istri dhan of the complainant and her parents for returning back the above said dowry articles (istri dhan) of complainant and her parents, is still continuing, until and unless the same are returned back to the complainant and her parentes. As all the dowry articles / istridhan are still lying in the illegal custody of the above named accused persons and they have misappropriated the same and used the same for their personal gain, to which they have got no legal rights to do so, rather on the other hand, all the above named accused persons have committed the offence punishable under section 406/498-A/323/504/506 IPC with the connivance of each other, intentionally, knowingly and deliberately, under the most aggravated circumstances, as fully explained above. Hence, all the above named accused persons are liable to be summoned, and dealt in accordance with law. Moreover, all the dowry articles as fully mentioned above were entrusted to all the accused persons at Mohalla New Surajganj, near Bhargo Camp, Jalandhar, which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of P.S. Division No.6, Jalandhar, hence this Hon'ble court has got the jurisdiction to entertain, try and decide the present complaint. It is therefore prayed that all the above mentioned accused persons may kindly be ordered to be summoned, tried and punished u/s 406/498-A/323/504/506 IPC and further they may be tried and punished in accordance with law, in the interest of justice.” Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 11 Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in fact the son of the petitioner and the complainant had got married against the wishes of their family. In these circumstances, there was no occasion of passing of any dowry articles to the petitioner. Compromise was also effected wherein the son of the petitioner and the complainant mutually agreed to end their marriage. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves dismissal. In the case of State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal , , 1992 Supp (1) Supreme Court Cases 335, the Apex Court has held as under:- “The following categories of cases can be stated by way of illustration wherein the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482, Cr.P.C. Can be exercised by the High Court either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently chennelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised:- (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complainant/respondent No.2, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 12 (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1)of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do no disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a Police Officer without an order of Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted)to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 13 where there is specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of aggrieved party. 7. Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceedings is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. We also give a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice.” A perusal of the complaint reveals that there are specific allegations levelled against the petitioner. Whether any offence as alleged in the complaint was committed by the petitioner or not would more appropriately be gone into and considered during trial. The complainant had led her preliminary evidence in support of her case and since a prima facie case was made out against the petitioner and his son Lakhbir Singh, the learned trial Court ordered that both, the petitioner and his son, be summoned to face the trial under Section 406,498-A IPC. So far as accused Crl. Misc. No. M- 27340 of 2010 (O&M) 14 No.3 and 4 are concerned, they were not ordered to be summoned by the trial Court as no prima facie case was found to have been made out against them. Since there are specific allegations levelled against the petitioner in the complaint, it would not be in the interest of justice to scuttle the criminal proceedings at the very threshold. Dismissed. (SABINA) September 16, 2010 JUDGE Anand