Balwant Singh and ors. vs Mohinder Singh and anr.

S.S. Rathore, J.

This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashment of complaint (Annexure P3) and impugned summoning order dated 1391990 (Annexure P4) to face trial under Section 406/498A, IPC.

This complaint was filed on 2251590 wherein all the petitioners have been arrayed as respondents. Precisely, allegations in the complaint are that Manjit Kaur daughter of the complainant was married to Balwant Singh, respondent No. 1 on 4121986. Respondent No. 2 Gurcharan Singh is real brother of respondent No.1, No. 3 is mother of respondent No. 1, respondent No. 7 is wife of respondent No. 2, who is brother of respondent No. 1, respondent No 4 is real sister of Balwant Singh, respondent No. 1, respondent No. 5 is real maternal father of Balwant Singh, respondent No 1 and respondent No. 6 Prem Singh is real brotherinlaw (Jeeja) of Balwant Singh, respondent No. 1. The relationship of the petitioners inter se is not disputed by either of the parties. Manjit Kaur, daughter of the complainant is stated to have died an unnatural death on 2631990. The precise case made out in the complaint is that at the time of performance of marriage, dowry was given to deceased Manjit Kaur as her Stri Dhan and the said property was entrusted to the accused. During the subsistence of marriage certain acts of cruelty were committed from time to rime demanding more articles of dowry and cash amount. It is also alleged in the complaint that on nonfulfilling the demands, said Manjit Kaur was given maltreatment which ultimately resulted in her death. It is also alleged in the complaint that in fact she has been killed or made to die. The complainant has claimed for return of the Stri Dhan being an heir of deceased Manjit in terms of Section 6(3) of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1971 as well.

Before embarking upon the merits of the case in the complaint, it is necessary to mention that after the death of Manjit Kaur, the complainant also lodged an FIR No. 49 dated 2531990 with Police Station Civil Lines, Ludhiana. Criminal case under Section 304B/34, IPC is pending with the competent court at Ludhiana and the matter is still under investigation with the Police. The FIR of that case is on the file of this case in the form of Annexure P2. A perusal of the said FIR against the present petitioners prima facie makes out incriminating allegations against Balwant Singh, Gurcharan Singh, Shan Kaur and Gurprit Kaur. The allegations in the said FIR have also been repeated almost in the same terms as in the complaint so far as giving of dowry articles and demands made from the parents of deceased Manjit Kaur for supply of scooter and cash etc. Under these circumstances, almost identical facts with little variation are covered in the present complaint as well as the FIR in question.

During the course of arguments counsel for the parties have very fairly agreed that proceedings in the complaint against respondents, Harminder Kaur, Ghasita Singh and Prem Singh be ordered to be quashed, resultantly the summoning order as well. And against others namely; Balwant Singh, Gurcharan Singh, Shan Kaur and Gurprit Kaur, the proceedings in the complaint may be allowed to continue.

Besides a fair agreement by the counsel for the parties as stated above, I have gone through the contents of the complaint. It is not uncommon that in such like cases, an attempt is made to implicate the near and dear relations of the members of the family of the husband. This observation of mine finds ample support from the fact that petitioners Harminder Kaur, Ghasita Singh and Prem Singh have not been named in any way in the FIR in question which was lodged immediately after the death of Smt. Manjit Kaur. The present complaint was lodged much later on and as such, these three petitioners seemed to have been implicated merely because they were relations of the husband of the deceased. Without scratching the matter further on this point and in view of the consensus reached at by the counsel for the parties, I order that complaint as well as the summoning order against these three petitioners Nos. 4, 5 and 6 stands quashed.

I would like to make it clear that two proceedings i.e. in the present complaint and in the FIR case are to take place at two different places against Balwant Singh, Gurcharan Singh, Shan Kaur and Gurprit Kaur. As stated earlier, they are facing identical allegations in the complaint as well as in the FIR. These four petitioners would be at liberty to raise all factual and legal pleas raised in this petition before the Courts below.

Anything said in this order, should not prejudice the mind of any of the trial Court. With these observations, the present petition is disposed of.