VARINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure of Code for quashing of FIR No. 160 dated 08.08.2007 under Sections 406, 498-A of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Dhariwal, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P1).

(2.) Facts of the case, in short, are that petitioner Varinder Kumar retired from service of Punjab Government, Department of Agriculture. He is 64 years of age and is a permanent resident of District Gurdaspur, Punjab. On 20.02.2002, complainant-Sanjogta married to Rohit Kapoor according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. The couple could not pull on together and difference cropped up between them. Complainant Sanjogta filed a complaint against all the family members of her husband as well as against the petitioner and his wife Vimla Devi and Maternal Uncle Satish Kumar. On the basis of aforesaid complaint, FIR 160 dated 08.08.2007 under Sections 406, 498-A of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Dhariwal, District Gurdaspur. The only allegation against the petitioner in the FIR is that he was given a Woollen Blanket and Rs.201/- as shagun. The complainant further alleged that at the asking of her-in-laws, the petitioner went to her parents house for collecting money. The main thrust of allegation in the FIR are against husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law. However, the police authorities submitted challan under Section 137 of Criminal Procedure of Code against the husband, the petitioner and sister-in-law only and declared mother-in-law and father-in- law innocent.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner is a distant relative of the husband of the complainant and is living separately at a far away place from the matrimonial home. Learned counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, stated that Rohit Kapoor, husband of the complainant has two sisters, namely, Mrs. Ruchi and Mrs. Ritu. He has three more "Massars' ( (mother's brother- in-law), 'Massies' (mother's sisters) and three 'Mamas'. In laws of Ruchi were living at just two houses neibourhood to Rohit Kapoor's parental house at Allahabad and she generally used to live at her parental house and was one amongst them in misappropriation and harassment. Mrs. Ritu, his second sister though living in the same house (her parental house) as she was left by her husband was not party to harassment and misappropriation and as such she was not named in the FIR. Two more 'Massies' and 'Massars' are not named. Two more "Mamas, are also not named. The complainant is not blowing anything out of proportion. She only named the person who is actually involved and was party to misappropriation and harassment and none else.