HUSSAN LAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. filed by the accused petitioners, seeking quashment of the criminal complaint dated 17-8-1999, copy Annexure P1 and the summoning order dated 28-8-2000, copy Annexure P2, vide which the petitioners have been ordered to be summoned as accused for the offences under Sections 406/498-A, IPC and also seeking quashment of the subsequent proceedings taken thereon.

(2.) In the petition it was alleged that the petitioners were unfortunate parents of Jagtar Singh, who was most unfortunate to marry complainant respondent No. 2, Smt. Parminder Kaur on 16-10-1988. It was alleged that after the marriage, respondent No. 2 Smt. Parminder Kaur and Jagtar Singh were leading happy and peaceful life and a son was also born in the year 1989. It was alleged that the complainant-respondent had gone to her parents house for the purpose of delivery and she had taken with her all her ornaments etc. It was alleged that after the delivery of the child, the petitioners had gone to see the complainant and the child and had taken with them valuable gifts etc. It was alleged that during the stay of the complainant in her parents house some trouble arose due to habits of her brother Karam Singh. It was alleged that when petitioner No. 1 along with his son and others wanted to get the matter compromised between them, said Karam Singh started nursing a grudge against the petitioners and his son, which resulted in a criminal case. It was alleged that said Karam Singh had divorced his wife and had remarried. It was alleged that he was virtually living on the earnings of his father besides earnings of complainant-respondent No. 2 who was forced to work as labourer in the fields. It was alleged that due to his behaviour the relations between the son of the petitioners and respondent No. 2 became strained which resulted in dissolution of marriage on 13-9-1999. It was alleged that on 17-8-1999, respondent No. 2, at the asking of her brother Karam Singh, instituted a criminal complaint, copy Annexure P1. levelling false allegations against the petitioners and their son. It was alleged that the said complaint was time barred inasmuch as the complaint is dated 17-8-1999, where she had left the house of the petitioners and had given birth to a son in 1989. It was alleged that the learned Magistrate, after recording preliminary evidence in the said time barred complaint, ordered summoning of the petitioners as accused under Sections 406/498-A, IPC, vide order dated 28-8-2000, copy Annexure P2. It was alleged that the order of summoning was passed in spite of the fact that the complaint was time barred in view of the provisions of Section 468, Cr.P.C. It was accordingly prayed that the criminal complaint and the summoning order and all subsequent proceedings be quashed.

(3.) No written reply to the petition has been filed.