Crl. Misc. No.M-35518 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-35518 of 2009 Date of Decision: April 26, 2010 Mewa Singh and another …..Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab and another …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.P.C. Suman, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Arshvinder Singh, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. The petitioners seeks quashing of FIR No. 287 dated August 4, 2009 under Sections 406, 420, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Tripri Town, Patiala and all the subsequent proceedings arising out of the said FIR. The said FIR was registered at the instance of Harnek Singh alleging that betrothal ceremony of Prabhjot Singh son of non-applicant Kirpal Crl. Misc. No.M-35518 of 2009 [2] Singh and Davinder Kaur had taken place on August 24, 2005 when a gold ring was given to petitioner No.1 and a pair of tops was given to petitioner No.2 as Shagun. Petitioner No.1 is the father of petitioner No.2. Kirpal Singh is son of petitioner No.1. Petitioner No.2 is sister of Kirpal Singh. The allegation against the petitioners as per the FIR is that on the ring ceremony of Prabhjot Singh various gifts were given to Kirpal Singh, father of Prabhjot Singh and his mother Davinder Kaur besides six golden rings, pair of tops were given to the relatives of the boy and a sum of Rs.8 lacs were spend on the function. After the betrothal ceremony, Prabhjot Singh and his family went to Italy. Thereafter the complainant had also gone to Italy twice. With the understanding of both the parties, the date of marriage was fixed as June 10, 2009. It is alleged that even invitation cards were distributed. The petitioners had even taken Simran Kaur to Ambala for shopping but subsequently a message has been received from Italy from the family of the boy that a sum of Rs.25 lacs be paid before of marriage. On account of inability of the complainant to meet the abovesaid demand, the date of marriage has been cancelled. The complainant had requested the family of the boy through relatives not to cancel the marriage but they remained adamant on the demand of Rs.25 lacs. The complainant had to face insult in the society and his daughter is suffering from depression. The family of the boy under a conspiracy is unnecessarily harassing the complainant through police. It has been alleged that one Asgar resident of Gaunspur, Tehsil Malerkotla was a go-between for the abovesaid relation and he was known to the complainant. Crl. Misc. No.M-35518 of 2009 [3] After going through the allegations in the FIR it transpires that the main allegations of cheating or misappropriation of the gifts and other articles levelled against the son of the petitioner Kirpal Singh and his wife Davinder Kaur as well as against Prabhjot Singh, the grand-son of petitioner No.1. So far as petitioners are concerned, the only allegation against the petitioners is that they have received gold ring and a pair of tops respectively at the betrothal ceremony. It is an admitted fact that the marriage of grand-son of petitioner No.1 has not yet been solemnized with the daughter of the complainant. The question of misappropriation of dowry articles does not arise. So far as the ingredients of cheating are concerned, it is not the case of the complainant that the petitioners, in any manner, had persuaded the complainant to part with any property with any forged promise. The act of petitioners having taken the daughter of the complainant for shopping may be a gesture of goodwill in the capacity as relation of Prabhjot Singh. The said act does not constitute an offence. Besides this, on investigation at earlier stage, the petitioners were found to be innocent vide report dated August 14, 2009, annexure P-3. No doubt the said report cannot be made a ground for quashing of the FIR but it certainly is a circumstance to be considered coupled with the factors mentioned hereinabove for determining whether the contents of the FIR fall within the parameters of the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, AIR 2004 SC 604 warranting quashing of the FIR. Seen in context to the parameters laid down in the abovesaid case, this Court is of the considered opinion that bare perusal of the allegations in the FIR against the petitioners do not constitute Crl. Misc. No.M-35518 of 2009 [4] any criminal offence under Indian Penal Code. The gifts given at the time of betrothal ceremony to the relations of the boy are not considered to be dowry articles. In this context reference can be made to the observations of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bhaskar Lal Sharma and another Vs. Monica, (2009) 10 SCC 604. It is always open to the complainant to seek the recovery of the same depending upon the circumstances of the case. There is no allegation of demand of Rs.25 lacs by the petitioners. The allegations, if any, are against Prabhjot Singh’s parents. Without expression of any opinion whether the son of petitioner No.1 and his family members had cheated the complainant with promise of green postures abroad, no offence is made out against the petitioners. Petitioner No.2 happens to be Bua i.e. father’s sister of Prabhjot Singh whose betrothal ceremony had been conducted in 2005. The petition is allowed. The FIR No. 287 dated August 4, 2009 under Sections 406, 420, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Tripri Town, Patiala against the petitioners is hereby quashed, in the interest of justice, being an abuse of the process of the Court. Nothing said in this order will prejudice the rights of the complainant to effect recoveries of various articles handed over to the petitioners by availing other alternative remedy. Nothing mentioned in this order is applicable qua the other co- accused of the petitioners. The proceedings against the said persons may continue in accordance with law. April 26, 2010 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE Crl. Misc. No.M-35518 of 2009 [5]