STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. AMARJIT SINGH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide this order, above mentioned application as well as revision petition would be disposed of as the State as well the complainant have filed the application under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Cr.P.C.' for short) and petition, respectively challenging the acquittal of the respondents by the Appellate Court.

(2.) Prosecution story, in brief, is that complainant was a Non-resident Indian. Marriage of his daughter Nirlep Kaur was solemnized with Gurpreet Singh on 11.3.2007. Complainant had spent about Rs. 7,00,000/- at the time of marriage of his daughter. The istri dhan articles of Nirlep Kaur were handed over to the respondents and they were to be taken by Nirlep Kaur to Canada. Gurpreet Singh after getting immigration, travelled to Canada. Gurpreet Singh and Nirlep Kaur had stayed in Ludhiana from 11.3.2007 to 20.3.2007 and the complainant was informed by his daughter that the respondents were expecting a car in dowry. In December 2007, Gurpreet Singh and Nirlep Kaur started residing in Canada. However, Gurpreet Singh started harassing his daughter and deserted her on 22.2.2008.

(3.) Trial Court vide judgment/order dated 20.4.2011 ordered the conviction and sentence of the respondents under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Aggrieved against the said order of their conviction and sentence, respondents preferred an appeal and the same was allowed by the Appellate Court vide order dated 26.4.2013. Consequently, the judgment/order of conviction and sentence dated 20.4.2011 were set aside.