Crl.Misc.No.M-27697 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: August 09, 2010. (1) Crl.Misc.No.M-27697 of 2008. Rikanjit @ Riganjit and another .. Petitioners VERSUS Suneeta Kumari. .. Respondent * * * (2) Crl.Misc.No.M-30678 of 2008. Kewal Singh and another .. Petitioners VERSUS Suneeta Kumari. .. Respondent * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI * * * PRESENT Mr.G.S.Sirphikhi, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Sumeet Narang, Advocate, for the respondent. . . . 1 Crl.Misc.No.M-27697 of 2008 . . . 2 Crl.Misc.No.M-27697 of 2008 M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) This order will dispose of the above noted two criminal petitions i.e., one filed by Rikanjit and another and the another filed by Kewal Singh and another. Petitioners Rikanjit Singh and Kewal Singh are the brothers of Jaspal Singh who was married to Sunita Kumari. She has levelled allegations that that she was maltreated and her dowry articles have been misappropriated by her in-laws. Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is absolutely no allegation against the petitioners and that in case the averments in the complaint are presumed to be true, no offence is made out against the petitioners. On the other hand, counsel for the complainant has submitted that pre-charge evidence is being recorded by the trial Court and in case there is no material against the petitioners, they can be discharged by the trial Court. I have heard the counsel for the petitioners as well as counsel for the respondent. Prima facie, I am of the opinion that there is no word mentioned by the complainant in the complaint against Rinky and Ruby. There is also no specific allegation against Neelam Kumari. So far as Kewal Singh is concerned, there is only a reference in the complaint pertaining to an earlier occasion when he had committed offence under Section 326 IPC. In the absence of preliminary evidence and the other material before this Court, it will not be appropriate to determine whether the material on the record . . . 3 Crl.Misc.No.M-27697 of 2008 does not constitute any offence against the petitioners. This petition is disposed of with a direction to the trial Court to carefully determine the allegations against the petitioners in the complaint and the evidence produced before the trial Court, at pre-charge evidence and in case the trial Court arrives at a conclusion that the allegations against the petitioners are vague, uncertain or there is no allegation against the petitioners, it will be open to the said Court to discharge the petitioners. It is further made clear that in case the trial Court finds that any improvements have been made in the preliminary evidence, at pre-charge evidence stage, merely to rope-in the entire family members, the said Court would be entitled to pass an order discharging the petitioners. Necessary steps will be taken within a period of two months after the receipt of a copy of this order. Disposed of. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE August 09, 2010. rka . . . 4