PARMINDER KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The crux of the facts & material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for deciding the instant petition and emanating from the record, is that, the marriage of complainant-Amarjit Kaur, daughter of Kuldeep Singh respondent No.2 (for brevity "the complainant") was solemnized with Gurdeep Singh son of Joga Singh, on 7.4.2002, according to Sikh religious rites and ceremonies at Jalandhar. The marriage was stated to have been solemnized with great pump and show by spending Rs. 6 lacs and sufficient dowry articles & other golden ornaments, besides customary gifts, were given by her parents at the time of marriage. According to the complainant that although a gold ring, kitty set (gold) and Rs. 21000/- were handed over to accused Davinder Kaur as well, but the accused demanded cash of Rs. 21/2 lacs, in lieu of other dowry articles, which were handed over to accused Joga Singh and Davinder Singh. The accused were claimed to have misappropriated her dowry articles and started maltreating, harassed and gave beatings to her.

(2.) Leveling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, the complainant claimed that all the accused have misappropriated her dowry articles, demanded cash of Rs.2,50,000/- and treated her with cruelty in connection with and on account of demand of dowry. In the background of these allegations and in the wake of complaint of the complainant, the present case was registered against accused Gurdeep Singh (husband), Surinder Kaur & Joga Singh (parentsin-law), Davinder Singh (brother-in-law) & Parminder Kaur petitioner sister-in-law (Devrani) of the complainant, by means of FIR No.13 dated 20.4.2011 (Annexure P3), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 406 & 498-A IPC, by the police of Police Station Women Cell, Jalandhar, in the manner depicted here-inabove.

(3.) Aggrieved by the initiation of the criminal prosecution, the petitioner (sister-in-law) has preferred the instant petition, to quash the impugned FIR (Annexure P-3), invoking the provisions of Section 482 Cr.P.C.