IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- Crl.Misc.No. M-7685 of 2008 Date of Decision:- 17.2.2009 Smt. Mahendro & Anr. Versus State of Haryana. Present:- Mr. Vivek Khatri, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Rattan Arora, AAG, Haryana. M.M.S.BEDI. (J) (Oral) Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 praying quashing of FIR No. 121, dated 10.5.2007 under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC and all other criminal proceedings emanating therefrom pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bahadurgarh, on the ground that bare reading of the contents of the FIR registered at the instance of Babita, do not constitute any criminal offence against the petitioners and that there is no material against the petitioners in the report presented by the police. The FIR registered at the instance of Babita reads as follows:- "My marriage was solemnized with Surender r/o village Soldha, Tehsil Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar, on 4.12.2004. That after marriage I immediately went to my in-laws home and lived there for one week with Surender as husband and wife. That my mother and father are farmers and my parents give more and many gifts to me in my marriage as they can afford. List of items is enclosed with this complaint. That after marriage I went three, four times in my in-laws home and lived there with Surender as Husband and wife. When I went second time in my in-laws home, then I started tortured by making some reasons by my husband Surender, my mother-in-law, my elder brother-in-law Daulat Ram, his wife Crl.Misc.No. M-7685 of 2008 -2- Mahendero Devi and taunted me to bring motorcycle and coloured T.V from my home and their behaviour to me were very rude and my mother-in-law always said to me that you came from very poor family. My husband Surender said that 'Every man have got motorcycle in their marriage, but your parents neither gave motorcycle nor gave colour T.V.' if they gave motorcycle to me then I can do all my works very easily and said to me if you want to live here then go and bring a motorcycle and except this my jaithani have illicit relations with Joginder husband of her own sister Anita. One day I saw my jaithani and Joginder in a very indecent situation and from that they also treated me by like this and also want to make relation with me and also one day he tried to do with me some bad works. When I went third time in my in- laws home then my husband and my mother-in-law started beating me and one 24.4.2005 my mother-in-law gave beating to me and thrown me from my matrimonial home and said that 'when your parents not give us motorcycle and colour T.V till then there is no place for you in our home' and ignoring my request all the above named persons throw me from their home at 12-1:00 clock, on 24.4.2005 and then I reached my aunt's Rajesh home at village Lakhubuwana and on next day my uncle dropped me to my parents home. In this context one, two times Panchayat was also convened but the above named persons don't agree and remained on their demands and said that when we not received motorcycle and colour T.V till then we not allowed your daughter to live in Crl.Misc.No. M-7685 of 2008 -3- our home. After that my husband Surender and I, filed divorce petition also with both of our consent, but the above named persons said that we not allow our son to give divorce to you till then you not gave cash of Rs.70,000/-, take legal action against all the accused persons." A perusal of the above said FIR indicates that there is only vague allegation against petitioner No.1 that she had taunted the complainant when the complainant had gone second time to her in-laws home and asked her to bring motor-cycle and colour T.V. Besides this, there are allegations that petitioner No.1 had illicit relations with petitioner No.2. The said allegations do not constitute any offence under Section 498-A or 406 IPC. In the FIR there is no specific article which could be said to have been entrusted to any of the petitioners being Istri Dhan of the complainant or that the petitioners had refused to return the articles of Istri Dhan on demand by the complainant. Petitioner No.1 is a widow who claims that she has been residing separetly. She is sister-in-law (Jaithani) of the complainant Babita. In support of her contention, certificate of Sarpanch that she is resident of village Bursham, Tehsil and Distt. Panipat has been placed on record. So far as petitioner no.2 is concerned he is not a family member of Surender but is a mediator who had facilitated the marriage by connecting both the families. There is absolutely no allegation against petitioner No.2. Moreover, he being not related to Surender cannot put under the ambit of Section 498-A IPC. Crl.Misc.No. M-7685 of 2008 -4- In view of the vague allegations against both the petitioners, the continuation of proceedings against them will be nothing but an abuse of procees of Court . Petition is allowed. FIR qua both the petitioners is quashed. All the criminal proceedings emanating from the FIR are not sustainable, as such are hereby quashed. This order will not in any manner prejudice the proceedings against the other accused, which can continue in accordance with law. Disposed of. February 17, 2009 (M.M.S.Bedi) tripti Judge