RAJINDER SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-husband has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure(hereinafter referred to as the Code) for quashing of FIR No.34/93, dated 23 January 1993, got registered at P.S. Paschim Vihar, New Delhi by respondent No.2 herein-the wife, under Sections 406/498-A Indian Penal Code, primarily on the grounds that:(i) Delhi Police has no jurisdiction to register the case and (ii) even taking the allegations in the complaint on their face value, no case can be made out under the said Sections.

(2.) Rajinder Singh - petitioner and Smt. Satvinder Kaur-complainant, were married at Patiala(Punjab) on 9 October 1990. They lived together in Patiala and a daughter was born on 19 December 1991 out of the wedlock. The marital life had apparently been unhappy, either because of demand for gifts from the petitioner's side, as alleged by the complainant or because of incompatibility and some other reasons, as alleged by the petitioner. Be that as it may, on 19 January 1992 at 3.40 PM a complaint was lodged by the complainant-wife at P.S.Kotwali, Patiala(DD No.18) alleging: that after the birth of a female child her in-laws had started harassing her and had beaten her many a time; on 18 January 1992 her husband had rung up her brother at Delhi and had told him to take her away for ever; when her brother and father had come to enquire about her welfare, all members of her in-laws' family misbehaved with them; snatched the child and threw her out of the house; she had come to inform that she, her father and brother had been threatened to be killed..... 'Action be taken'. However, the same day at 8.20 PM another information(DD No.28) was given to the said Police Station by the complainant with a request not to take action in DD 18 as due to intervention of some persons, the complaint got diarised in the morning about threat to her life, had been compromised and her father was taking her to Delhi along with some mentioned jewellery/gold items, clothes etc; leaving rest of her articles at her in-laws' house, and she was taking her child along for which only she will be responsible; and she was going to Delhi as per her own will without any pressure from her father and brother. It seems that on 4 March 1992 the complainant wrote a letter to SHO, P.S. Paschim Vihar, New Delhi alleging threats from the petitioner and seeking protection. On 30 April 1992 a complaint was lodged against the petitioner in the Crime Against Women Cell, Delhi. It was on 23 January 1993 that the impugned FIR under Sections 406 and 498A Indian Penal Code for the alleged "occurrence dated 9 December 1990 at Patiala" was lodged at P.S.Paschim Vihar, New Delhi. (emphasis supplied)

(3.) On the lodging of the FIR, police authorities at Delhi swung into action and arrested the petitioner on 4 February 1993 at Patiala; allegedly effected certain recoveries there and brought him to Delhi; produced him before the Metropolitan Magistrate, who remanded him to judicial custody and ultimately the petitioner was enlarged on bail on 9 February 1993.