Anil Kumar vs Rita Kumari

N.K. Aggarwal, J.

This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, the Code) for quashing the criminal complaint filed by the respondent, Rita Kumari, under Sections 406 and 498A, Indian Penal Code, in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar.

Counsel for the petitioners has not appeared though he was informed about the date of hearing by the office.

A criminal complaint was filed by Rita Kumari, respondent against five persons, namely, her husband Anil Kumar Goel, fatherinlaw Amar Nath, Motherinlaw Asha Rani, sisterinlaw Shashi Bala and one Surinder Kumar. The complainant, Rita Kumari, was married to Anil Kumar Goel on September 10, 1989. She alleged in the complaint that the accused persons demanded dowry from her parents. Since the demand was made a day earlier to the marriage, her parents had to agree for the same as all preparations for marriage had been completed. She alleged that articles mentioned in Annexure `A'' (annexed with the complaint) were given by her parents. The accused persons were, however, not satisfied and they started maltreating her. She was abused and insulted. She further alleged that she was turned out by accusedpetitioners 1 to 4 from the house after giving beatings to her on July 10, 1990.

The learned Magistrate has passed the order summoning the accused persons for the offence under Section 406, Indian Penal Code, on a perusal of the complaint and the statements, it is noticed that no date and time have been mentioned regarding the entrustment of the articles listed in Annexure `A''. The details of the entrustment have also not been given. There are only vague allegations. An offence under Section 406 Indian Penal Code, would be prima facie made out if it is shown that any valuable article was entrusted to anyone and he dishonestly misappropriated it. Nothing has been said to the effect that any demand for the return of the articles was made and it was declined. No dates have been mentioned with regard to the demand of the article which are stated to have been entrusted to the accused persons. Further, there is no specific allegation against any of the five accused persons to show what article was entrusted to which accused persons. The allegations are general and vague in nature. It was necessary for the complainant to make specific and distinct allegation against each accused showing the entrustment of any article to him and its misappropriation with dishonest intention. In this situation, the present petition under Section 482 of the Code deserves to be allowed.

In the result, the petition under Section 482 of the Code is allowed and the order of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar, dated June 5, 1991, summoning the accused persons for offence under Section 406, Indian Penal Code is quashed.