Baljit Kaur & others vs State of Punjab & another

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of the order dated 19.05.2016

(Annexure P-2) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar,

whereby the revision petition has been dismissed which was filed by the

petitioners against the order dated 22.12.2015 (Annexure P-1) in complaint

No. 22/2225/15 passed by learned JMIC, Amritsar wherein the petitioners

have been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to face trial.

In brief, the facts are that an FIR bearing No. 183 dated

24.09.2014, under Sections 498-A and 323 of the IPC came to be registered

at Police Station Amritsar City, District Amritsar. It was alleged by the

complainant that her marriage was performed with one Jagjit Singh son of

Jagtar Singh on 25.02.2014 as per Sikh rites and rituals at Amritsar. Before

her marriage, she used to go to the house of Jagjit Singh to take tuition from

his sister Baljit Kaur wherein she was raped against her wishes by Jagjit

Singh. She was threatened that in case she discloses this incident to anyone,

she and her family members would be killed. The matter was eventually

compromised and in terms of the compromise, Jagjit Singh married her. At

the time of marriage, she was a minor. Despite marriage, she has been

continuously harassed by her husband Jagjit Singh and her in-laws for

dowry. Allegations were made against Jagjit Singh, Sukhraj Kaur, Baljit

Kaur and Gurpreet Singh for giving her beatings. Pursuant thereto, the

matter was investigated and the ACP, Amritsar found Baljit Kaur, sister of

the husband of the complainant and her husband Gurpreet Singh s/o Gian

Singh to be innocent while holding that the complainant was harassed and

suffered beatings by her husband and her mother-in-law regarding demand

of dowry and it was recommended that a case under Sections 498-A and 323

of the IPC be registered against them. During the proceedings, statement of

the complainant was recorded in which again allegations against Baljit

Kaur, sister-in-law, and her husband Gurpreet Singh were made by stating

that they tried to kill her. It was on the basis of this statement that an

application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was filed and the same was allowed

by learned JMIC, Amritsar by order dated 22.12.2015. Against the said

order, a revision petition was preferred before learned Additional Sessions

Judge, Amritsar which was dismissed, vide impugned order dated

19.05.2016. Hence, aggrieved against the summoning, under Section 319

Cr.P.C., the instant petition has been filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners

have been summoned to face trial on general allegations in which they have

been found innocent in the enquiry conducted before the registration of the

FIR. In fact, petitioners No. 1 and 2 are the sister-in-law and her husband

who were married prior to the marriage of the complainant and are residing

separately. It is also argued that petitioner No. 3 Gurpreet Singh, the brother

of the husband of the complainant, is a student and residing in a hostel and,

therefore, there was no occasion for him to be summoned in proceedings

initiated under Sections 598-A and 323 of the IPC. Counsel for the

petitioners also argues that the complainant while having her statement

recorded has changed the version under the FIR and once they have been

found innocent in the investigation that was conducted, the Courts below

have erred in summoning them in proceedings under the FIR. It is also

argued that in the judgment rendered in Hardeep Singh vs. State of Punjab

and others, 2014 (3) SCC 92, the Apex Court has categorically held that

without there being cogent evidence which would lead to conviction,

persons ought not to be summoned.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their

assistance have also gone through the record of the case.

In the FIR that was registered on 24.09.2014, a specific

allegation of harassment at the hands of Jagjit Singh and his family

members has been raised. It is also alleged that when after Rakhi she went

back to her in-laws'' house, the above said accused namely Jagjit Singh,

Sukhraj Kaur, Baljit Kaur and Gurpreet Singh, in connivance with each

other, gave her beatings and threw her out of her matrimonial home and

thereafter she reached her mother''s house who got her admitted into Guru

Nanak Dev Hospital, Majithia Road. She had also given a complaint at 181

against the above said accused persons. Even if, in the investigation, they

were found innocent, a statement of the complainant has been recorded

wherein specific details have been given regarding the alleged physical

abuse. This is a matter of evidence. The arguments of the learned counsel

for the petitioners with regard to separate residence and not residing jointly;

is not a ground enough to allow the instant petition. It is to be noted that in

the FIR, it had been specifically stated that rape had been committed upon

the complainant by Jagjit Singh in his house where she used to go to take

tuition from Baljit Kaur, his sister. In all probabilities, the marriage between

the parties was an effort to patch up the matter since the complainant was a

minor. Therefore, it cannot be ruled out, at this stage, that the complainant

was not ill treated at the hands of her in-laws.

Therefore, this Court finds no ground for interference qua

petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, hence, the petition qua them is dismissed. However,

since there are no specific allegations against petitioner No. 3-Gurpreet

Singh son of Jagtar Singh (Devar) in the FIR itself, the petition qua him is

allowed.

While disposing of the petition, it is made clear that any

observation made herein shall have no bearing on the merits of the case

which is to be decided upon evidence led.