KRISHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Santosh Rani, complainant, in F.I.R. No. 213 lodged on 4-7-1988 at P.S. City Kaithal had alleged that she was married to Baldev Raj accused on 4-4-1984 at Kaithal according to Hindu rites, Her parents and brothers allegedly spent Rs. 40,000/- on her marriage. The complainants brothers had spent Rs. 3,000/- on the Rokna ceremony, i.e. the accused was given Rs. 1100/- as Tikka besides spending of Rs. 1400/- on sweets etc. and Rs. 500/- on milni. Baldev Raj accused No.1 was also given Rs. 5000/- in cash with the understanding that he will deposit the same with the Bank in the name of the complainant as her individual exclusive property. Piare Lal accused is the father of Baldev Raj husband while Babu Ram, Krishan Chand, Om Parkash and Sham Lal are the brothers of the husband. It is alleged that the dowry articles worth Rs. 24/25,000/- were entrusted to both the accused jointly. Soon after the marriage, Baldev Raj, i.e., the husband and the other family members started maltreating the complainant for having brought less dowry and demanded Rs: 5000/- for television and cooking gas. The family of the complainant paid this amount after about three months of the marriage but the accused failed to purchase the television or the cooking gas. The respondents continued torturing the complainant to the extent of putting her to thinking of committing suicide. Ultimately, she was turned but of the house by the accused respondents in the month of July 1985, as she failed to fulfill their demand of Rs. 10,000/- from her parents for the purchase of scooter. She was also mercilessly beaten at the time of turninglier out. It is further averred that Baldev Raj accused failed rehabilitate her despite the intervention of respectables and they have refused to return the above referred articles of dowry. Along with the FIR (Annexure p. 2) list of articles given in dowry was appended.

(2.) All the accused-petitioners excepting Baldev Raj husband have moved for quashment of the first information report mainly on the ground that the allegations regarding entrustment of the dowry articles and torture are vague and that the petitioners are residing separately from aforesaid Baldev Raj husband and there is no question of returning the articles of dowry or torturing Santosh Rani by them.

(3.) On notice the respondent State has filed return contending that the allegations against petitioners regarding entrustment of dowry and maltreatment are specific and that the chalan has been put in Court and the trial Court shall examine all these aspects of the matter while framing the respective charges.