ROMESH LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under section 561 -A Cr. P. C is directed against the proceedings initiated through challan pending in the Court of Munsiff, Judicial Magistrate, 1st. Class, R. S. Pura, under Section 498 -A of R. P. C. In order to understand the situation brief facts of the case need to be noticed. Petitioner Romesh Lal is married to Respondent No.2 Mst. Sudesh Kumari. Their marriage was solemnised in the month of April, 1994 and they have a daughter from this wedlock. Petitioners Faquir Chand and Vidya Devi are the parents of Romesh Lal. Petitioners Sardari Lal and Mst. Pooro Devi are his uncle and aunt, and Sujjan Singh petitioner is the son of latter.

(2.) FURTHER case as revealed from the record is that on 13th Feb. 1998, Smt. Sudesh Kumari Respondent No.2, hereinafter referred to as the complainant, lodged a complaint in writing at Police Station, Women Cell, Canal Road, Jammu, when she was accompanied by her father Tara Chand. According to the complainant at the time of her marriage, her parents gave her dowry within their means. For one year her husband was cordial to her. However, after the birth of the female child who at the time of making complaint was two and a half years old, all the respondents started causing harassment as well as teasing her. This exercise was aimed at compelling and coercing her to bring more and more dowry from her parents. Reason being that she had brought lesser dowry as compared to other girls married in the village. Miseries of the complainant did not end here but at such times she was threatened by her husband and was forcibly thrown out of her matrimonial home, with a direction to get more dowry. Number of Panchayats were held for re -conciliation. Petitioner No.1 agreed to behave and took back the complainant in his company and also assured to mend his way as per the case of the complainant. In this background lastly on 13.1.1998 in the evening, as per the complainant, she was thrown out of her house by the respondents. At such time she was asked to return only after having brought Rs. 20,000/ -, failing which there was no need for her to return. Petitioner No.1 further threatened to marry someone else.

(3.) FACED with such circumstances complaint was came to be lodged against all the respondents. After receipt of information police machinery swung into action. Recorded statements of Tara Chand, father of the complaint, Kunti Kumari her mother, Satpal and Surban Kumar as well as Gian Chand, last three persons are the residents of Village R. S. Pura. So far as the statements of Numberdar and two above named persons are concerned they reveal that at the time of marriage, father of the complainant had given dowry to her as per his resources. They have further supported the case of the complainant regarding panchayats having been held for settlement between husband and wife.