CRM No. M-6087 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-6087 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 04.03.2009 Gurmit Singh and another ...Petitioners Versus The State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. S.S. Hira, Advocate, for the petitioners. Rajan Gupta, J. This petition has been preferred for quashing of FIR No.4 dated 5th January, 2009, registered under Sections 498-A, 406, 324, 323 read with Section 34 IPC at Police Station Adampur, District Jalandhar. The FIR was lodged by Geeta Devi. According to the allegations in the FIR, after marriage, Geeta Devi was harassed by her husband, father-in-law and sister-in-law (Nanand). The father-in-law and sister-in-law are petitioners herein. The complainant alleged in the FIR that she was subjected to continuous harassment for bringing less dowry at the time of marriage. The complainant also alleged that she was given beatings by her in-laws and husband. In view of the fact that there are three children from the wedlock, the complainant went back to matrimonial home pursuant to a compromise dated 22nd December, 2008. However, thereafter she was again subjected to cruelty. On 4th January, 2009, the complainant was beaten up by the petitioners as well CRM No. M-6087 of 2009 2 as her husband. The complainant has alleged that her husband even given a knife blow on her left arm. Allegations of severe beatings have also been levelled against the sister-in-law. Learned counsel for the petitioners has sought quashing of the FIR on the ground that allegations in the FIR are totally false and that no offence under Sections 406, 498-A IPC is made out. This apart, the police station at Adampur had no jurisdiction to register the FIR. The counsel has placed reliance on a judgment reported as Manish Ratan & Ors. vs. State of M.P. & Anr., 2007 (1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 513. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and carefully considered the submissions made before this court. It is evident from a perusal of the FIR that serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioners and direct role has been attributed to both the petitioners in harassing the complainant for not bringing sufficient dowry at the time of marriage. The plea of the petitioners that they have been falsely implicated in the case, is not tenable at this stage. Moreover, the case is still under investigation. The plea of false implication at this stage cannot be entertained by this court. As regards the jurisdiction of police station Adampur to register the FIR, it is evident that complainant is a resident of village Gazipur within the jurisdiction of Police Station Adampur. The list of dowry articles given in the FIR are stated to have been entrusted to the CRM No. M-6087 of 2009 3 petitioners at the time of marriage within the jurisdiction of the said police station. The judgment relied upon by the petitioners in Manish Ratan's case (supra) would not thus be applicable to the facts of the present case. Under the circumstances, I find no merit in this petition. The same is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE March 04, 2009 'rajpal'