SURJIT SINGH Vs. JASWANT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for quashment of complaint Annexure Pl, and resultant proceedings, including the summoning order Annexure P2 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Samrala.

(2.) IN brief, facts relevant for disposal of this case as emerge from the complaint filed by Jaswant Kaur are, that she was married to Bharpur Singh on 31-5-85 according to Anand Karaj ceremony. After their marriage both of them lived and cohabited together as husband and wife. No child was, however, born from the said wed-lock. It was further alleged that articles of dowry mentioned in the list attached with the complaint were entrusted to the accused by the parents and relatives of the complainant, after the marriage, with the direction to the accused to give the said articles of dowry to the complainant is and when demanded. The accused having the custody and entrustment of the said articles were bound to return the same to the complainant. It was also alleged that in spite of an expenditure of handsome amount by the parents of the complainant on marriage, all the accused in furtherance of their common intention subjected the complainant to all sorts of mental and physical cruelty causing injury and danger to life and health of the complainant, and, also harassed the complainant and her parents with a view to coerce the complainant to meet their unlawful demand of more dowry. It was also alleged that the complainant was illegally confined by the accused in a room, and with great efforts and requests the complainant was rescued by the father of the complainant and Bachan Singh, Sarpanch, to whom the complainant narrated maltreatment meted out to her, as well as the fact of her illegal confinement. They Also refused to return the aforesaid articles of dowry to the complainant.

(3.) IN my view there is considerable force in the contention raised by, the learned counsel for the accused-petitioners. Entrustment of movable property which is alleged to have been dishonestly misappropriated by the accused-petitioners is an essential ingredient to constitute an offence, punishable under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code. Mere general allegations made in the complaint, or in the statements of the witnesses concerning entrustment of articles of dowry to all the accused at the time of marriage or such like vague allegations would not be sufficient to prima facie make out a cognizable offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code. I find support on this point from single Bench authority of this Court in Kishan Sharma and ors. v. State of Haryana, 1989(2) Recent Criminal Reports 13.