PRAKASH KAUR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. to quash the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 645/05 Smt. Devendra Kaur Vs. Mahender Pal Singh and others pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh and to recall the summoning order dated 30. 8. 05 passed by the learned C. J. M,, Aligarh in that case.

(2.) THE facts relevant for disposal of this application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. are that the complainant opposite party No. 2 filed the aforesaid complaint against the accused-applicants in the Court of the learned C. J. M. , Aligarh with these allegations that the marriage of complainant opposite party No. 2 had taken place with accused-applicant No. 3 Mahendra Pal at the paternal house of opposite party No. 2 in Shyam Nagar P. S. Civil Lines, Aligarh on 21. 4. 1996. In that marriage the father of opposite party No. 2 and her other relations had given dowry as well as 'stridhan' and incurred other expenses as mentioned in the list (1) attached with the complaint, and all these items were entrusted with accused-applicant No. 3 and his mother applicant No. 1 and sister applicant No. 2 with this understanding that all these items would be delivered to opposite party No. 2 on reaching her husband's house. The accused, however, were not satisfied with the dowry and were demanding one lakh rupees in cash. In the month of June, 1997, they forced the opposite party No. 2 to leave the house after keeping her all ornaments, clothes and 'stridhan. ' She was pregnant at that time. She came to her father's house at Shyam Nagar, Aligarh, and since June, 1997 she had been residing at her father's house. She gave birth to a son on 3. 8. 1997 in a nursing home. Since accused-applicant No. 3 was not ready to keep her with him as his wife, she filed Suit No. 696/99 Smt. Devendra Kaur Vs. Mahendra Pal Singh for restitution of conjugal rights in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aligarh. Mahendra Pal Singh refused to keep the complainant opposite party No. 2 as wife and so ultimately a divorce took place between them by mutual consent on 9. 5. 02. At that time, it was agreed that the 'stridhan' of the complainant opposite party No. 2 shall be delivered to her. Her Stridhan and all her ornaments, clothes etc. and other items got at the time of marriage were entrusted with the accused persons and they were supposed to keep them properly. The complainant opposite party No. 2 filed a case for maintenance of her minor son and she demanded her 'stridhan' in that case also, but the accused-applicant No. 3 did not return her 'stridhan', and ultimately on 14. 12. 02 the complainant opposite party No. 2 with her father Preetam Singh Arora and witnesses Harbhajan Singh Gulati and Harmit Singh Gulati went to the house of the accused to demand her 'stridhan' but they did not return the same. Then she gave a notice on 24. 12. 04 to the accused persons but the accused did not accept the notice and misappropriated her 'stridhan', and in this way they had committed an offence punishable under Section 406 I. P. C. It was therefore prayed that action should be taken against accused persons. This complaint was filed on 18. 1. 05.

(3.) LEARNED Magistrate after recording the statement of the complainant opposite party No. 2 under Section 200 Cr. P. C. and of her father Preetam Singh Arora and other witnesses Harbhajan Singh Gulati and Harmit Singh Gulati under Section 202 Cr. P. C. was of the view that a prima facie case under Section 406 I. P. C. appeared against the accused Mahendra Pal Singh, his mother Smt. Prakash Kaur and sister Harmeet Kaur @ Pinky. Therefore, the learned Magistrate summoned all the accused persons under Section 406 I. P. C.