Crl. Misc. No. M-21749 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-21749 of 2008 Date of decision : 28.09.2010 Parminder Singh ....Petitioner versus State of Haryana and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr. S.S. Dinarpur, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Malik, A.A.G., Haryana for respondent No.1-State. **** M ehinder S ingh S ullar, J. (Oral) The conspectus of the facts, which need a necessary mentinon for a limited purpose of deciding the core controversy involved in the present petition and emanating from the record, is that the marriage of Balwinder Kaur was solemnised with accused Sukhwinder Singh on 16.11.1997 as per Hindu/Sikh Rites and Ceremonies. At the time of marriage, sufficient dowry articles were stated to have been given by her parents, but the accused party was not satisfied with the same. Thereafter, they started demanding more dowry articles and on her refusal, they harassed and gave beatings to her. 2. Levelling a variety of allegations in all according to the prosecution, the accused treated the complainant with cruelty in connection with and on account of demand of dowry. On the basis of aforesaid allegations and in the wake of complaint of the complainant, the present case was registered against the petitioner-Parminder Singh along with his other co-accused, namely, Gurnek Crl. Misc. No. M-21749 of 2008 -2- Singh, Supinder Kaur (parents-in-law), Amrinder Kaur (sister-in-law), Jaswinder Singh(brother-in-law) and Sukhwinder Singh(husband of the complainant), vide FIR No. 93 dated 26.05.1999, on accusation of having committed the offence punishable under Sections 406, 498-A, 323 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC, by the police of Police Station Sadar Ambala. 3. Having completed all the codal formalities and on ultimate analysis of the evidence on record and the fact that the matter was compromised between the parties and the main witnesses complainant PW1-Balwinder Kaur and her father PW2-Gurcharan Singh did not support the prosecution case at all. Instead of supporting, they have totally demolished the prosecution case in its entirety. The trial Court acquitted all the accused on the basis of compromise by virtue of impugned judgment of acquittal dated 08.05.2008(Annexure P-5). 4. As petitioner-Parminder Singh, brother-in-law of the complainant did not submit to the jurisdiction of the court, therefore, he was declared proclaimed offender vide order dated 11.05.2006(Annexure P-2). 5. Now, the petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing the FIR and all subsequent proceedings, including the impugned order(Annexure P-2), vide which, he was declared proclaimed offender. 6. As is evident from the record that the co-accused of the petitioner have already been acquitted in the main case, which was registered on the basis of the instant FIR, vide impugned judgment of acquittal(Annexure P-5). 7. At the very outset, on instructions from ASI Surjit Singh, learned State Counsel has submitted that no supplementary challan has yet been submitted by the police against the petitioner. Rightly so, as all the accused have already been acquitted on the basis of compromise by the trial Court and the main case culminated into the judgment of acquittal(Annexure P-5), therefore, there appears to be no justification for the police to submit the supplementary challan against the Crl. Misc. No. M-21749 of 2008 -3- petitioner. Because, it will naturally be an exercise in futility in this relevant connection. At the same time and for the similar reasons, order(Annexure P-2) declaring the petitioner as proclaimed offender, is hereby set aside in the obtaining circumstances of the case. 8. In this view of the matter, the present petition has become infructuous and the same is hereby dismissed as such. 9. Needless to mention that, if the petitioner is required in any subsequent proceedings in the instant case, then the police will give 10 day's prior notice to enable him to avail his appropriate remedy in this regard, in accordance with law. (Mehinder Singh Sullar) Judge September 28, 2010 naresh.k/seema