RAKESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused-petitioners through this petition filed u/ S. 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seek the quashment of the complaint FIR, copy Annexure P-1, and the order of the trial Court, copy Annexure P-2, holding that a prima facie case for framing charges for offences u/Ss. 406 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code is made out against them, inter alia, on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction to try the offence punishable u/S.498-A of the Indian Penal Code and vagueness of allegations regarding entrustment of money. This petition was admitted only on the point of territorial jurisdiction.

(2.) The brief resume of facts relevant for the disposal of this petition is that the marriage between Rakesh Kumar accused and Sunita Rani, complainant, admittedly took place at Ludhiana according to Hindu religious rites on 12- 10-1987. About fifteen or twenty days prior to this arranged marriage, Rakesh Kumar husband along with his parents Ram Lal and Kamlesh Rani, accused-petitioners, and one Ravinder Nath Arora went to Ludhiana for finalising the date and other arrangements of marriage. These persons then made a condition precedent to the marriage that Rakesh Kumar Kalia would enter into matrimonial bond with the complainant only if her parents gave fridge, colour television, scooter and cash of Rs. 21,000/ -. It is averred that the parents of the complainant gave all the articles in the dowry except scooter and colour television. The articles mentioned in the list annexed to the complaint were handed over to Rakesh Kumar, Ram Lal and Kamlesh Rani, accused-petitioners. Immediately after the marriage, the accused started maltreating the complainant in order to force her to bring colour television and scooter from her parents. The complainant then apprised her parents of this episode. Accordingly, on 20-10- 1987, on the occasion of marriage of Ashwani Kumar, brother of the complainant, Rs. 5,100/ - were given to her husband Rakesh Kumar accused at Ludhiana. The inlaws, however, did not feel satisfied with this amount and continued maltreating the complainant. On the refusal of the complainant that her parents are unable to provide scooter and colour television, the husband of the complainant started beating the complainant with a leather belt. In the month of April, 1988, when the complainant was serving dinner, her husband Rakesh Kumar under the effect of intoxication and her mother-in-law started beating her and broke her glass bangles. The complainant the raised alarm, upon which the broken pieces of glass bangles were thrusts in the abdomen of the complainant, by telling her tauntingly that let people hear, her shrieks. The complainant, however, continued bearing this, maltreatment like a devoted Indian wife with the hope that better sense would prevail one day. It is further averred that in the month of May, 1988, the above referred accused persons along with Bittu brother of her husband gave her beating. Her mother-in-law also tried to set her on fire in the kitchen by intentionally throwing the stove from the cooking slab. The cloths of the complainant caught fire but she saved herself by wrapping in a blanket. A few days thereafter she came to her parents house at Ludhiana on the pretext of ailment of her mother and apprised, her parents of this episode, but her parents asked her to be tolerant and ultimately her brother left her at Ambala in the house of her in-laws. Even thereafter, in the month of October, 1988, her husband and mother-in-law gagged her mouth while her father-in-law started beating her with a wooden rafter. Ashok Kumar, a relation of the complainant who was residing in that locality at Ambala, was attracted to the house and ultimately he sent this information to the parents of the complainant at Ludhiana. Consequently, the father of the complainant came to Ambala and lodged a report with the police. The police recovered the complainant from the house of her in-laws and recorded her statement. She was also produced before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ambala, and thereafter sent in the custody of her parents, who brought her to Ludhiana. She was also medico-legally examined. It is further averred that the accused has refused to return Stri Dhan of the complainant. On the application of the complainant Exhibit P 1 to the Senior Superintendent of Police, a case for the above referred offences was registered at the Police Station and after completion of investigation, the challan was put in the Court for offences under Ss. 498-A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Ss. 3, 416 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(3.) After hearing the Prosecutor and the accused, the trial Court, however, vide its order dated 24-2-1990 found a prima facie case for offences under Ss. 406 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code against husband and parents-in- law of the complainant. Bittu, brother of the husband, and Shri Ravinder Arora were, however, discharged. The trial Court rejected the contention of the accused regarding lack of territorial jurisdiction to try the offence under S. 498-A of the Indian Penal Code at Ludhiana by holding that the allegations for offence under this Section as well as under S. 406 of the Indian Penal Code being part of the same transaction, the Ludhiana Court had the jurisdiction to try the offence.