GURVEL SINGH Vs. RAJINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRIMINAL Misc. No. 5482-M of 1988 has been filed by petitioner-husband against his father-in-law Rajinder Singh for quashing First Information Report Annexure P. 1 dated August 3, 1985 on the grounds that civil suit inter-parties for the same relief of return of dowry articles is already pending in the court of learned Senior Sub Judge, Gurdaspur, that complaint is hopelessly barred by limitation in terms of Section 468 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, that allegations set out in the complaint do not make out the commission of any offence by the petitioner in as much as there is no allegation of specific entrustment of any particular item of dowry to the petitioner or his parents and that the complaint Annexure P-l is obviously an abuse of the process of the Court for reasons aforesaid.

(2.) IN Criminal Misc. No. 3622 of 1989 filed for vacation of the stay order granted to the petitioner ex-parte by my learned brother H. S. Rai, J. on August 25, 19,88 respondent Rajinder Singh admitted the passing of decree for mandatory injunction of civil suit No. 115 filed on June 15, 1982 and decided on July 25, 1988 for specific return of dowry articles by the petitioner to his wife Inder Pal Kaur, asserted that misappropriation of dowry articles was a continuous offence and stated that both the civil and criminal proceedings could simultaneously go on and as such Criminal Misc. filed by the petitioner-husband merits dismissal.

(3.) I have beard Shri M. C. Sethi, Sr. Advocate, with Shri Amit Sethi, Advocate, for the petitioner, Shri G. S. Bawa, Advocate, for the respondent and have carefully gone through the record.