Crl. Misc. No. M-15073 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M-15073 of 2008 Decided on : 09-07-2009 Daljeet Kaur @ Bawa ....Petitioner VERSUS Sunita @ Sarabjit Kaur ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present:- Mr. Gaurav Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. MAHESH GROVER, J This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashing of complaint no.220 dated 31.8.2007 u/Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 506, 34 IPC and consequent summoning order dated 8.12.2007 arising therefrom. The petitioner is the un-married sister-in-law of the respondent- complainant. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a bare perusal of the complaint reveals that there are general allegations which have been made and there is no specific allegation against the petitioner. It is further contended that even if the allegations are taken to be correct it does not constitute the commission of any offence specially when no rule has been attributed to the petitioner. No one is present on behalf of the respondent, although a reply was filed on an earlier occasion. In the reply filed broadly the allegations which are made in the complaint are reiterated. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal Crl. Misc. No. M-15073 of 2008 2 of the complaint, I am of the considered opinion that there is merit in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The complaint which is filed against a person has to specially delineate the role of the person who is accused of committing an offence. By making general and vague allegations, the complainant cannot hold a person captive to the rigours of a trial. It is settled principle of law that if a complaint does not disclose commission of an offence and assign any role then in such an eventuality, the same can be quashed. In case State of Haryana and others versus Bhajan Lal and others AIR 1992 SC 604(1) following principles were laid down for considering the quashing of a complaint:- 1. Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. 2. Where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156 (1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. 3. Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. 4. Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable Crl. Misc. No. M-15073 of 2008 3 offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. 5. Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. 6. Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. 7. Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/ or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” Having regard to the aforesaid and also keeping in view the fact that no role has been assigned to the petitioner in the complaint and the allegations if at all are taken to be correct does not constitute the commission of any offence and also considering the fact that the dispute essentially is on account of a marital discord where the petitioner is un- married sister-in-law of the complainant-respondent, I am of the considered opinion that the present petition deserves to succeed. Consequently, Crl. Misc. No. M-15073 of 2008 4 complaint no.220 dated 31.8.2007 u/Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 506, 34 IPC and consequent summoning order dated 8.12.2007, arising therefrom, qua the petitioner are hereby quashed. July 09, 2009 (Mahesh Grover) rekha Judge