SOM DEVI Vs. VEENA KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SMT . Soma Devi and others, who are standing trial in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate I Class, Ludhiana, have come to this Court in this criminal miscellaneous under Section 482. Cr.P.C. for quashing of the complaint under Section 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and section 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) ANNEXURE P2 is the complaint instituted by Smt. Veena Kumari. The averments made therein are that she was married to Virender Kumar Sharma petitioner-3 on 11-1-1982. Shri Jagdish Bhardwaj acted as ago between. Thaka ceremony was performed on 28.11.82. A few days before the marriage, all the accused persons made a demand for giving a number of articles, enumerated in paragraph 2 of the complaint. The terms put forth by the accused were agreed to under compulsion and to avoid humiliation, as the marriage had already been fixed. The articles enlisted in Annexure A and a sum of Rs. 8,000/- were given at the time of marriage. The accused brought the articles mentioned in Annexure B and delivered the same to the complainant, but since she was in bridal dress and could not open the same the same were also entrusted to the accused. After marriage, the complainant found that the accused were not satisfied with the dowry articles given and they exhibited their dissatisfaction. The articles which were given at the time of marriage, were retained by them and converted to their own use. Her husband did not treat her properly. The accused started making demands for other articles, as had been agreed to. As this demands was not met, she was turned out of the house. Efforts of her father to arrange her rehabilitation at the house of her husband failed. On 1.2.84 Shri Onkar Sharma, brother of her husband, took the complainant to Ludhiana, and left her at the bus stand. Before leaving her matrimonial house, she had made a demand for the articles of dowry and Stridhan, but the same was refused, Since, 1.2.84 she has been living with her parents. She had then brought a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act and an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. which proceeding were still pending. On 29.9.88 both the said cases were fixed in the Courts when her husband made an offer to take her back. She readily agreed to the same. From the Court, she accompanied him, but he left her at Jalandhar, telling her that she should agree to divorce. When she reiterated her demand for dowry articles, the same was also declined. To put pressure on her, her father was got arrested from Police Station, Mahalpur, but his release was secured with great difficulty.

(3.) NO facts have been brought forth that the impugned complaint is mala fide.