Crl. Misc. No.M-12191 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No.M-12191 of 2011 Date of Decision: 04.05.2011 Kiranjit Kaur ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present:- Ms. Harpreet Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? ** NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C for issuance of directions to respondent No.2 to get the investigation conducted from the crime branch or a higher rank officer of another district against respondents No.4 to 10 after registering the FIR against the accused on the complaint filed by the petitioner regarding the unnatural death of the father-in-law, namely Charan Singh r/o Village Bodal Keeri, Tehsil Khadoor Sahib, District Tarn Taran and regarding the harassment to the petitioner on account of dowry by the private respondents. The petitioner is the daughter-in-law of the deceased. The story put forward by the petitioner is that the deceased has been murdered by his own family i.e his wife, daughters and the son as he used to help the petitioner i.e his daughter-in-law. It is admitted that the petitioner filed applications/complaint to the said effect and the enquiry was duly conducted by the Deputy Crl. Misc. No.M-12191 of 2011 2 Superintendent of Police, Bhikhiwind in the said complaint. As per the said enquiry, the present petitioner was found to be submitting applications one after the other levelling allegations against her husband Gurdev Singh, mother-in-law Joginder Kaur and sister-in-laws for implicating them in one or the other case. While the demand of the maruti zen car in dowry and giving beatings were not proved, the allegations against the in-laws for the death of her father-in-law too were held to be false. As per the said enquiry, Charan Singh died when he stepped down in the well through the wooden ladder for putting belt on the motor of the tubewell. However, the steps of the ladder broke and he fell down in the well. He died on the spot. Since, Kiranjit Kaur was not getting on well with her in-laws, she used the opportunity to file a complaint against her in-laws, alleging therein, that her father-in-law was murdered by his own wife, daughters and son. While filing the said complaint, she did not disclose that she had earlier also filed applications regarding the demand of dowry and harassment against her husband Gurdev Singh, mother-in-law-Joginder Kaur and sister-in-laws. After enquiry, her complaint was found to be false. The said application/complaint was recommended to be consigned in the office. The petitioner insisted on her complaint and accordingly, the second enquiry was held by the Superintendent of Police (HQ) Tarn Taran. The Superintendent of Police (HQ) Tarn Taran, too, found the allegations to be incorrect. Thus, the petitioner, in spite of the said finding of the enquiry has moved the present petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C for issuance of directions to respondent No.2 to get the investigation from the crime branch or a higher rank officer of another district against respondents No.4 to 10 after registering the FIR against the accused on the complaint (Annexure P-5) filed by her regarding the unnatural death of the father-in-law, namely Charan Singh. The allegations made Crl. Misc. No.M-12191 of 2011 3 by the present petitioner are highly improbable. The petitioner is the daughter-in-law who is not having good relations with the family of her in-laws, which is evident from the various applications/complaints filed by her. Thus, the reason for making bald and vague allegation that her father- in-law was killed by his wife and daughters and son is obvious. As per the enquiry conducted, the father-in-law died on account of having fallen into the Well while working on the spot. The post mortem was conducted. No poison was found. He died on account of fall in the well while he was putting belt on the motor of the tubewell installed in the well. The enquiry was conducted by the Senior Officers. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not able to point out as to how the enquiry was not fair and proper and as to why the same should be handed over to Crime Branch. In view of the above, the same is dismissed being devoid of merit with liberty to file a criminal complaint qua the allegation of harassment and demand of dowry, if so advised. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) 04.05.2011 JUDGE gurpreet