IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.M.M.O. No.41 of 2011. Date of decision: 21.06.2011 Smt.Sunita Chaudhary … …Petitiioner Versus State of H.P. & Others … …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Dev Darshan Sud,J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No. For the Petitioner: Mr.S.D. Gill, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr.Vinod Thakur, Deputy Advocate General. Dev Darshan Sud,J. This petition has been preferred under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying that the proceedings in case No.24/1 of 2011 under Section 498-A IPC pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Court No.1, Paonta Sahib be quashed and set aside. 2. The primary reason urged by the petitioner is that the petitioner has been named nowhere but was only responsible for playing the role of bringing the two families together for getting the marriage of the complainant arranged. Counsel submits that in the 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement? Yes. 2 absence of specific allegation of cruelty against her, it is a case of sheer abuse of the process of the Court and in these circumstances, further proceedings against the petitioner requires to be dropped. 3. Prima facie from the material on record placed by the State it appears that on the statement made by the complainant, it is alleged that the petitioner herein was also one of the persons responsible for harassing the petitioner for bringing insufficient dowry. At this stage, this Court will not sift the evidence with a fine tooth comb for ascertaining the veracity of the allegations. The matter is before the trial Court and if it is found on the evidence that no offence has been committed by the petitioner, the result would obviously be acquittal, coupled with the right that the petitioner can always claim damages, if so permitted by law. In these circumstances, this petition is disposed of. June 21, 2011 (Dev Darshan Sud) (aks) Judge.