LAWS(P&H)-1994-1-105

HARPAL SINGH Vs. RAVINDER KAUR

Decided On January 24, 1994
HARPAL SINGH Appellant
V/S
RAVINDER KAUR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HARPAL Singh and others have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the complaint against them under Sections 406, 498-A I.P.C. Annexure P/1 and summoning order Annexure P/2.

(2.) THE complaint was filed against the petitioners by Ravinder Kaur wife of Harpal Singh petitioner. Gurnam Kaur petitioner is the mother of Harpal Singh and Surinder Kaur petitioner is his sister. As per averments made in the complaint marriage of Ravinder Kaur was solemnised with Harpal Singh in September, 1984 according to Sikh rites and ceremonies and thereafter they lived and cohabited together as husband and wife upto 1988 at Killa Rajpur, District Ludhiana. A daughter named Soni was born out of this wed-lock. At the time of marriage dowry articles as given in the list Annexure A.1 were entrusted to the petitioners with the clear understanding that those were meant for the exclusive use of the complainant and were to be handed over to her as soon as she reached her matrimonial house, on her demand. The petitioners were not satisfied with the dowry as that was far less than their expectations and they started maltreating the complainant. She was given beating many a time by her husband at the instigation of his mother and sister. On 12.8.1988 the complainant was given merciless beating and she was turned out of the house. She was not allowed to take her minor daughter with her. She narrated all these facts to her father and a panchayat was taken to the house of the petitioners for rehabilitation of the complainant. The petitioners refused to keep the complainant with them and they insulted the panchayat. They retained all the dowry articles and did not return the same in spite of demand.

(3.) IN the return filed by the respondent the averments made in the petition were denied and it was contended that the ingredients of the offences under Sections 406, 498-A I.P.C. were made out from the allegations in the petition and the petitioners were rightly summoned to face trial for those offences.