GULAB SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) GULAB Singh and others, by means of this criminal miscellaneous under Section 482. Cr.P.C. seek the quashing of the FIR No. 43 dated 26.3.89, under Section 406/498-A IPC, registered at Police Station Chandi Mandir, Annexure. P1 and the order of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ambala dated 23.3.89.

(2.) THE impugned complaint against the petitioners was made by Smt. Santosh Kumari respondent-2 before the learned Magistrate who forward the same to the SHO under Section 156 Cr.P.C. for investigation and registration of a case. On the basis of the complaint, the impugned FIR was registered. According to the averments made in the complaint, respondent-2 was married to Gulab Singh petitioner-1 on 3.6.87. Mangat Ram petitioner-2 and Smt. Gurdev Kaur petitioner-3 are his parents; While Labh Singh petitioner-4 and Ram Singh petitioner-5 are his brothers and Kulwant Kaur petitioner-6 is his sister. At the time of respondent's marriage, her father Barkha Ram gave sufficient dowry, as detailed in the FIR. Both the spouses, lived and cohabited together at village Siamru in Ambala District. After marriage, she was kept in a nice manner, but thereafter the petitioners started taunting her about insufficiency of dowry. In September 1987, petitioner-1 at the instance of his other relatives, threw the respondent out of their house, remarking that either she should bring Rs. 10,000/- or a scooter from her father. Finding no alternative, she returned to her parents in just three clothes. Her father then gave Rs. 5,000/- to Gulab Singh and she returned to her matrimonial home. However, maltreatment started soon thereafter and her husband was so cruel that he insulted her in presence of other relatives. On the visit of her maternal uncle, petitioner-1 again repeated his demand for Rs. 12,000/-. It was, however, explained to him that it was not possible her parents to give that amount. After her maternal uncle left for his village, the respondent was buried abuses and given beatings. Smt. Gurdev Kaur and Kulwant Kaur tried to pour kerosene on her, but she was rescued by the neighbours on 28.2.88. Petitioner-1 left her at her father's house, telling her that until his demand was met, be would not keep her in his house. Since then she has been living at her parents' house. All the articles of Istridhan had been retained by petitioner and his other relatives (accused-persons in the complaint) and in spite of demand, the same have not been handed over to her.

(3.) THERE are no specific allegations of entrustment of dowry articles to any particular individual. However general averment is made that the dowry articles were entrusted to the accused persons. Petitioner-1 and his wife, respondent-2 had lived together for about 8 months. It can safely be presumed that if any dowry articles were handed over to any relatives of petitioner-1 those must have been taken by him and his wife. There are, thus, no sufficient grounds to meet the requirements of law, to make out the offence under Section 406, IPC against the petitioners other 'than Gulab Singh.