MANINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer made in the present petition by the petitioners is for quashing the FIR No. 23 dated 02.05.2005 registered under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code at police station Purana Shalla District Gurdaspur. Stating briefly the facts are that this case has been registered against the four petitioners at the instance of respondent No. 2 Maninder Kaur, who was married to one Mandeep Singh on 13.02.2000. Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 are mother and father of said Mandeep Singh. Thus, they are mother-in-law and father-in-law of respondent No. 2. Petitioner No. 2 is sister of Mandeep Singh and petitioner No. 1 is her husband. Thus they are sister and brother-in-law of the husband of respondent No. 2.

(2.) This marriage got into trouble soon after the date of marriage. Respondent No. 2 had filed a complaint against her husband Mandeep Singh in the month of November 2000 on the basis of which, an FIR No. 117 dated 01.11.2000 was registered. Mandeep Singh and his mother, the accused-persons in the case were arrested. The dowry articles were recovered and accused were challaned. After trial Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur convicted Mandeep Singh and his mother Avtar Kaur ( petitioner No. 3 ) on 16.01.2002 and thereafter released them on probation. This order has been annexed with the present petition and perusal of the same shows that a compromise was effected between the husband and complainant Maninder Kaur ( respondent No. 2 ). Now after a lapse of more than three years, another FIR has been got registered by respondent No. 2 and present proceedings have been initiated against the petitioners. On the basis of this FIR, petitioners No. 3 and 4, who are stated to be 70 and 75 years old respectively, were arrested. The allegations are that they were being forced by the police to pay Rs. 7.5 lacs for compromising the case. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 however, were granted interim bail by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur. It is also disclosed in the petition that husband of the complainant namely Mandip Singh has already gone abroad in the year 2003 and since then the complainant is living with her parents in village Purana Shalla. Giving this background, it has been urged that the present complaint has been fabricated by giving false details with vague allegations. It is averred that no date of any alleged cruelty has been disclosed in the complaint on the basis of which FIR was registered. Copy of the FIR has been annexed as Annexure P2 with the petition. A prayer in the petition is for quashing the FIR.

(3.) Perusal of the FIR shows that the complainant has mentioned that the articles, which had been got recovered by the police during the earlier criminal proceedings, were returned to the petitioners after compromise on a promise that they would be kept for exclusive use of the complainant. It is claimed that this was done to see that the complainant was settled in the matrimonial house. It is also stated that the gold ornaments and jewelry taken on superdari, were entrusted to Mandip Singh, Trilochan Kaur and Maninder Singh. It is further disclosed that the utensils and unstitched suits were entrusted to Smt. Avtar Kaur. It is then claimed that Maninder Singh and Trilochan Kaur had assured the respectables and panchayat that the complainant would not be tortured by putting illegal demands. This was statedly done on 17.01.2002 after the decision of the case on 16.01.2002. As per the complainant, the behavior of the accused remained good towards her for about six months and then they again started harassing and torturing her mentally. Demand of dowry of Rs. 2.00 lacs along with Zen Car were raised by the accused as per the allegations. It has been disclosed by the complainant that she was left with her parents by Mandeep Singh, her husband on 04.04.2003 by saying that he would take her back only in case the demand of cash and Car was met. From the facts as narrated above, it is clear that the complaint is staying with her parents since 04.04.2003. It is also clear that she could only stay with the petitioners from 17.1.2002 to 04.04.2003. As such all the instances of cruelty and demand of dowry could be between this period only. She has now not made any allegations against her husband Mandip Singh, who had allegedly left her at her parent's house with the demand of dowry. Obviously she is aware that she will not be in a position to prosecute the allegations against her husband, who had admittedly gone abroad in the year 2003.