Crl. Misc. No. M-35953 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-35953 of 2010 Date of Decision: December 10, 2010 Harmeet Kaur …..Petitioner Vs. Gurdarshan Kaur and another …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr. Rajiv Kataria, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) The complaint filed by the petitioner for initiating proceedings against the respondent for defamation stand dismissed by the trial Court. The order of dismissal of complaint has been affirmed by the revisional Court. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and her husband Amarjeet Singh had been falsely implicated in the case and that the FIR has been quashed by the High Court vide order dated May 10, 2009. Crl. Misc. No. M-35953 of 2010 [2] Since the petitioner and her husband had been falsely implicated in the case it had lowered their esteem in the eyes of others as such offence of defamation is made out against the respondents. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and gone through the orders passed by the trial Court as well as by the revisional Court and I am of the opinion that no ground is made out to exercise inherent jurisdiction in the present case. Taking into consideration the fact that the allegations against the petitioner and her husband were vague and no specific allegation had been levelled, this Court had quashed the proceedings qua the petitioner in the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage the petitioner cannot be permitted to turn around and say that there were allegations against the petitioner and her husband. Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that an attempt to drag the petitioner and her husband will constitute an offence and that the respondents could have been summoned to face trial. I have heard counsel for the petitioner in that aspect and I am of the opinion that this petition has been filed with misconceived notions with an attempt to drag a person in a criminal case. It appears that it is a case where the petitioner with vindictive mind wants to settle other scores with the process of law. Dismissed. December 10, 2010 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE