J.L. MEHTA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DR . J.L. Mehta and his daughter Smt. Sarita Gogia have moved this Criminal Miscellaneous under Section 482 Cr. PC for quashing First Information Report No. 136, dated 10-10-90, registered at PS West Chandigarh, under Sections 406, 498-A, 323 and 506 Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and all the subsequent proceedings.

(2.) THE impugned FIR, annexure P1, has been registered on the application moved by Smt. Shalini Mehta wife of Capt. Pardeep Mehta. It is alleged therein that the marriage between the parties was performed on 14-2-89 at Chandigarh. and it was negotiated on the basis of an advertisement got published in the Tribune by the Mehta family. The complainant was given dowry, detailed in paragraph 2 of the complaint. Gifts were also made by-her in-laws. Within a fortnight of the marriage, Smt Sarita, her sister-in-law started taunting her that her parents had not given enough dowry expected of their status and her brother, being a commissioned officer in the Army. They had expected a new car in dowry, but even a scooter was not given. This statement of Smt. Sarita was supported by complainant's father-in-law Dr. J.L. Mehta and mother-in law Smt. Sneh Mehta. They asked her to convey this fact to her father that either a new Maruti car or its equivalent in cash be given. Her husband also showed his displeasure and made that very demand. She, however, told them that her father was not in a position to meet this demand. All the dowry, including most of the jewellery and cash, was taken away by her mother-in-law and she was given only one ring, two gold bangles and mangalsutra and some clothes for daily wear. On the instigation by her parents-in-law and her sister-in-law, her husband started treating her with cruelty while they were at Mhow (MP) and compelled her to carry heavy luggage/trunks, resulting in miscarriage. She fell ill and became physically weak. She was made to work as a maid and in Sept., 1989 she fell ill. She remained admitted in the Military Hospital. During her illness, her husband told her that she would not become mother and his inheritance would go to his nephew (sister's son) Master Paras. After completing the training at Mhow, she came in the company of her husband to Chandigarh and stayed with her in-laws. On no occasion she was allowed to visit her parents alone. After availing of the leave, her husband took her to Srinagar and he continued committing the acts of cruelly towards her. He used to threaten her that he would kill her and make it appear as an accident, Since she over cautions, she frustrated the plans of her husband. On 21-7-90 her husband brought her to Chandigarh and left her at the busstand. She reached her parents house and has been living with them since then. On the basis of above allegations, she complains of cruel treatment and tortures on account of inadequate dowry.

(3.) THERE are allegations of cruelty against the husband and retention of dowry articles by mother-in-law and the non-petitioners. So far as the present petitioners are concerned, the allegations made are of giving her some taunts and soon after the marriage giving out their mind that they had expected a car in dowry and that she has not brought even a scooter in marriage. It is also complained that it was at the instigation of her parents-in-law and sister-in-law that her husband maltreated her. This maltreatment is stated to have been meted out to her at Mhow and Srinagar where her husband remained posted. There is no allegation of any illtreatment during her stay at her in-laws' house in the months of January and February, 1989 when her husband had come on a month's leave. However, she was not allowed to meet her parents.