SHIV SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHIV Singh has filed this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying that the order of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Balotra, dated 14 -11 -1984 taking cognizance of an offence under Section 406 IPC against him, may be set aside and the proceedings be quashed.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts leading to the present petition are as under On 22 -6 -1984, Bhanwar Singh filed a report at police station Mandli in which it was stated that on 19 -4 -1983, the present petitioner Shiv Singh along with some other persons came to his village and offered to marry his two daughters to his two sons Bhagwan Singh and Mohan Singh. According to the complainant, he first declined to accept this proposal but on the instance of Shiv Singh, he agreed to it and fixed 21 -4 -1983 for the formal engagement. The complainant goes on to allege that on 21 -4 -1983, the formal engagement was made and cocounts were given to Bhagwan Singh and Mohan Singh in the presence of the neighbours. His daughter Saroj was engaged with Bhagwan Singh and Indra with Mohan Singh. At that time, Shiv Singh and his associates told him that there was a custom of 'mitai -kothali' according to which the in -laws of the girl give ornaments and clothes to the girl and, therefore, he may also give ornaments and clothes to the daughters of Shiv Singh whereupon the complainant gave four gold churies weighing four tolas, a pair of gold tops weighing one tola and a set of clothes worth Rs. 500/ - to each of the two girls and entrusted these articles to Shiv Singh on behalf of the two girls. It was alleged that Shiv Singh agreed that at the time of the marriage, these oranments and clothes will be returned to the complainant when the two girls come to his house.

(3.) ON this, the complainant along with some other persons went to Shiv Singh to accost him and his associates why they had defrauded them and also to ask them for the return of the ornaments and clothes. According to the complainant, Shiv Singh and his associates refused to return the ornaments and thus they had committed offences under Sections 420 and 406 IPC.