IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-5231 of 2008 Date of decision: 19th February, 2009 Manjinder Kaur … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Yogesh Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anter Singh Brar, Deputy Advocate General Punjab for the State. Mr. S.S. Rangi, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying that order dated 18th September, 2007 passed by the Judicial Magistrate (1st Class), Ludhiana, whereby application filed by the petitioner for summoning Surinder Singh, Narinder Singh and Harinderpal Kaur has been declined, be set aside. Impugned order has been annexed with the present petition as Annexure P-5. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the FIR registered against Narinder Singh, Surinder Singh and Harinderpal Kaur was quashed by this Court on 4th January, 2002 in Criminal Misc. No. 287-M of 1994. Present petitioner was arrayed as respondent No.2 to Criminal Misc. No. 287-M of 1994. In the impugned order, it has been noticed that not only proceedings have been quashed but the allegations levelled against the Criminal Misc. No. M-5231 of 2008 respondent No.2 to 4 do not constitute any offence as they were given gift at that time of marriage. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are brothers of the husband of the complainant and respondent No.4 is wife of brother of the husband of the complainant. Trial Court considered the evidence and held that there is no necessity to summon respondent Nos.2 to 4 as accused by invoking Section 319 Cr.P.C. When the FIR was quashed qua respondent No.2 to 4, this Court had observed as under: “From a perusal of the complaint, copy Annexure P1, which was made the basis for recording the FIR, copy Annexure P3, in my opinion, it would be clear that no case for quashing the aforesaid FIR and all subsequent proceedings, taken thereon, including the charges framed on 16.9.1993, is made out in respect of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 namely Sher Singh and Surjit Kaur (parents-in-law), considering their close relationship with Devinder Singh, husband of the complainant. So far as petitioner nos. 3 to 5 are concerned, they are the brothers and Bhabhi of Devinder Singh. No specific allegation had been levelled against them in the FIR. On the other hand, only vague allegations have been levelled against them. It appears that the petitioner nos. 3 to 5 have been falsely implicated in this case only in order to harass them, considering that they are related to Devinder Singh (husband). In my opinion, the continuation of the proceedings against petitioner nos. 3 to 5 would amount to abuse of process of Court. This is especially so when there is a general tendency to rope in almost all the relatives of the husband. For the reasons recorded above, the present petition is partly allowed and the FIR, the challan and further proceedings, including the charges framed on 16.9.1993 against petitioner nos. 3 to 5 are hereby quashed. So far as petition on behalf of petitioner nos. 1 and 2 namely Sher Singh and Surjit Kaur (parents-in-law) is concerned, the same is hereby dismissed. 2 Criminal Misc. No. M-5231 of 2008 Petitioner nos. 1 and 2, through their counsel, are directed to appear before the learned trial Court on 4.2.2002 for further proceedings in accordance with law.” Counsel for the petitioner has stated that after the proceedings were quashed, Manjinder Kaur appeared as PW-1. Counsel has stated that in her testimony, Manjinder Kaur has deposed against the respondents as under: “The gold neckless weight 40 gms consisting of ear rings alongwith complete set, 31 ladies suits in suit case were given to the Sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of Sher Devinder Singh namely Harinder Pal Kaur and 1 gold set weigh 40 gms was given to Harinder Pal Kaur. One woolen suit and one gold ring were given to Surinder Singh. One gold ring and woolen suit were given to Narinder Singh. They also gave a gold set weighing 40 gms to me. The good reception was given to the Barat. After two months from the marriage they started quarreling with me on the pretext that they had demanded the car on the marriage but the car was not given and at least scooter should have been given.” xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx “His brother Narinder Singh and Surinder Singh, Harinder Pal Kaur Sister-in-law (bhabi), Surjit Kaur mother-in- law said that the affection developed by Sher Davinder Singh with me is not good because I was not fit for Sher Davinder Singh. Thereafter, they turned out from the house in the month of October 1991.” She has further stated as under: “It is stated that accused present in the Court Sher Devinder Singh, Sher Singh father-in-law, Mother in law Surjit Kaur, Brothers Surinder and Narinder Singh, Davinder Pal Kaur and Harinder Pal Kaur w/o Surinder Singh Bhabi, in connivance with each other harassed me on the pretext of 3 Criminal Misc. No. M-5231 of 2008 bringing less dowry. On the excessive maltreatment given by them I took him to my parents.” It has been further submitted that Bahgwant Singh, brother of Manjinder Kaur, when appeared as PW-2, has also stated as under: “Sher Singh was given 8 gold rings, 5 blankets and Surinder Singh was given one gold ring, woolen suit, 5 blankets. The brother Narinder Singh was given one gold ring, one woolen suit, 5 blankets. Harinder Pal Kaur was given 31 ladies suits, One suitcase, one gold set alongwith Eartopas. All these articles were given with the direction to hand over Manjinder Kaur, which was her Istridhan. One gold neckless was given to Manjinder Kaur by her in-laws and the gold neckless given by us was worn by Manjinder Kaur. After 2 – 2 ½ months the aforesaid persons started misbehaving. Sher Davinder Singh their father, mother Surjit Kaur, Surinder Singh, Narinder Singh, Harinder Pal Kaur to Manjinder Kaur on the pretext that she is neither educated nor beautiful. Sher Davinder Singh used to beat her and the remaining were harassing on the pretext that they have committed a fault by solemnizing the marriage with Manjinder Kaur. They all used to say that they have neither given the dowry as per their demand nor a Car. They were saying that they were expecting Rs.10 lacs. Thereafter, they started pressuring my sister to bring Hero Honda. They came to our house on one day. Manjinder Kaur narrated the entire things to my father.” xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx “Sher Davinder Singh, Sher Singh father and all the family members were present there and they met us. They told that they will rehabilitate the girl only when we will pay a sum of Rs.2 lac to them. Thereafter, my brother asked them to return all the dowry articles if they do not want to rehabilitate the girl.” 4 Criminal Misc. No. M-5231 of 2008 On a pointed question asked, whether the portions reproduced above formed part of statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. or not, counsel for the petitioner has stated that he is unable to say anything. Counsel has further stated that these allegations were there in the FIR and in the statements annexed with the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. Counsel has relied upon ‘Krishnappa v. State of Karnataka’ 2004 (4) RCR (Criminal) 678 and ‘Brindaban Das and others v. State of West Bengal’ 2009 (1) RCR (Criminal) to contend that even after the quashing of the FIR, if any evidence surface, accused can be summoned. I am of the view that this evidence has been taken into consideration by the trial Court, while declining application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. The discretion has been rightly exercised by the trial Court. This Court, while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., cannot sit in appeal over the discretion exercised by the trial Court. Furthermore, similar evidence was before a Coordinate Bench in 2002, when the FIR was quashed. Even otherwise, from the averments made, it is apparent that the entire family of the husband is being harassed. Hence, there is no merit in the present petition and the same is dismissed. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE February 19, 2009 rps 5