KRISHAN JEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners were charge-sheeted under Sections 406, 498-A IPC vide order dated 8.2.2000 on the ground that they have harassed and humiliated the complainant for bringing insufficient dowry and for committing criminal breach of trust as dowry articles entrusted to them have been misappropriated.

(2.) DURING the pendency of the trial the petitioners filed an application for dropping the proceedings on the ground that the allegation in the FIR is also the subject matter in the divorce petition under section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter called 'the Act') before the Additional District Judge, Hisar. The divorce petition was decided on 10.12.1996. The civil court in the divorce proceedings has also held that the allegations levelled against the petitioners that they had demanded the dowry and harassed the complainant have been found false. The judgment of the civil court is binding upon the criminal court. The complainant filed the reply to the application. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hissar dismissed the application vide order dated 6.8.1998. The petitioners aggrieved by that order filed revision petition before the learned Sessions Judge, Hissar and the same was dismissed vide order dated 19.1.2002. Aggrieved by that order, the petitioners have filed the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for dropping the proceedings and discharging them in FIR No. 354, Police Station Civil Lines, Hissar, under Sections 406, 498-A Indian Penal Code.

(3.) SHRI Ajai Lamba, learned counsel of the petitioner submitted that the divorce has been allowed in favour of the respondent on the ground that the marriage between the parties is a dead marriage. He contended that the judgement is to be read as a whole and not in isolation. He contended that the learned Additional District Judge in paragraphs 17 and 18 has discussed in detail the act and conduct of both the parties. After discussing the act and conduct of both the parties in paragraph 24, it has been specifically held that the charge of allegations levelled by the respondent against the petitioner with regard to cruelty and demand of dowry are not proved. He contended that in the present case, the allegations against the petitioner are that they have harassed and tortured the complainant on account of demand of dowry. Thee subject matter in this petition as well as in the divorce petition was the same. The findings recorded by the civil court are binding upon the Criminal court, therefore, the proceedings are to be dropped.