HARVINDER SIGH KHURANA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Article 226 read with Section 482 cr. P. C. for quashing of FIR No. 1198/06 under Section 498a/406/34 IPC registered at PS Lajpat Nagar filed by respondent No. 2 against the three petitioners. Petitioner no. l is husband of the respondent No. 2 and petitioners No. 2 and 3 are jeth and jethani (brother-in-law and his wife) of respondent no. 2.

(2.) THE petitioner No. l was married to respondent No. 2 on 19th July, 1992. They have two children. A perusal of FIR shows that the complainant/respondent No. 2 made allegations in FIR that at the time of marriage her parents had given dowry but the petitioners, were not satisfied with the dowry given and she was taunted that the dowry articles were not up to the mark. The elder brother of her husband Parvinder singh Khurana and his wife played a leading role in causing harassment, humiliation to the respondent No. 2 by describing the dowry articles as sub-standard and insufficient as a result that the relations between her and her husband were strained and never cordial. She was also asked to bring rs. 2,00,000 from her parents for enhancement of their business, which demand could not be fulfilled. She continued to live with the petitioner hoping that happy days may come and good sense may prevail upon but it did not happen. She made specific allegations against her husband in the FIR in the following terms: that the husband of the applicant Shri harvinder Singh has been indulging in bad habits like drinking, womanizing etc. The applicant also made her best efforts that he should leave his bad habits but all in vain. He is daily drinker and some time, he come to house at objectionable hours in the dead night and dead drink on being objected by the applicant, he always created rowdy scenes even annoy the neighbourers and to the applicant. He is in habit of hurling filthy abuses and he is also in the habit of beating physically to the applicant and thereby caused physical and mental tortures. It has been learnt by the applicant that the husband of the applicant also keeps a concubine and reside with her at Panipat. The applicant has been subjected to cruelties to the extent that he has created serious horror in her mind and she has a. serious apprehension to her life. She further made allegations in the fir in the following terms: He stopped the Taxi and brought out can of petrol etc. and he wanted to throw the petrol etc. over the applicant but fortunately, the parents of the applicant helped her in getting her inside the door and bolted. He tried to throw the petrol and some petrol poured on her clothes. When he failed in his attempt, then out of frustration, he poured the petrol himself and lit himself. As a result of that he sustained burn injuries and he was removed by the police who had come immediately at the spot and he was admitted to Civil Hospital, anandpur Sahib but later on he was shifted to P. G. I. Chandigarh. The entire expenses were borne by the father of the applicant. Later on, his family members came at the Chandigarh hospital and he tried to blame the parents of the applicant. However, the police registered a case under Section 309 ipc at PS Anandpur Sahib vide FIR no. 75/01 dated 22. 8. 2001.

(3.) IT is undisputed that the respondent no. 2 had also filed a petition under Section 10 of Hindu Marriage Act for judicial separation from her husband. Copy of this petition being HMA No. 2/2003 is placed on record. In this petition, respondent No. 2 stated that relations between her and her husband became strained after about two years of marriage, however, the dispute between respondent No. 2 and her husband was amicably settled by mother-in-law. After the death of mother-in-law her husband again started teasing and maltreating her on flimsy matter especially after consuming liquor and started beating her and threw her out of matrimonial home along with her daughter. There was intervention of relatives and she was sent to her matrimonial home on the assurance of her husband that he would behave properly. Even after that, behaviour of her husband did not improve and he gave threats to burn her forcibly by pouring kerosene oil. She went to her. parents' house and narrated about these threats to her parents. Again the matter was got resolved and petitioner No. 1 again, promised not to drink liquor in future, not to misbehave and give threats and respondent no. 2 joined his company. However, the maltreatment of respondent No. 2 at the hands of petitioner No. l continued and his threats also continued with the result that she had to leave the company of petitioner no. 1. along with children on 24th May, 2001. She got a job of teacher in Anandpur Sahib and got admitted her children there and she started living there since May, 2001.