Diwan Chand vs Raj Rani

G.S. Chahal, J.—Diwan Chand, along with his father Sardari Lal and mother Smt. Swarna Rani, petitioners-1 to 3 respectively, have moved this criminal miscellaneous Under Sections 482, Cr.P.C. for quashing the complaint No. 49 dated 9-10-89, Under Sections 4, 4B and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 406, IPC, pending in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate I Class, Rajpura.

The impugned complaint Annexure P1 has been filed by Smt Raj Rani wife of petitioner-1.

According to the complainant, she was married to petitioner- 1 on 19-1-81 at Rajpura. At the time of marriage, she was given articles which were entrusted to the petitioners and their other relations. The petitioners were, however, not satisfied with the dowry and they have been making demands for a Fridg and Rs. 10,000/- in cash. Since the complainant could not meet that demand, she was turned out of her matrimonial home on three occasions The dowry articles were not returned to her in spite of demands. This demand was even repeated pending the proceedings Under Sections 125, Cr.P.C. and another proceeding under the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The learned Magistrate, after recording preliminary evidence summoned the present petitioners, while the complaint was dismissed against Mamta Rani (daughter) and Ashok Kumar Raj Kumar (sons) of petitioner- 2 Sardari Lal. In the order, it is observed that the dowry articles had been entrusted to Diwan Chand and "at the most to Sardari Lal father of Diwan Chand and Swarna Rani, the mother of the accused." The allegations made in the complaint with respect to the entrustment of dowry, are vague. No specific articles are alleged to have been entrusted to a specific person, rather, a general statement is made with respect to the entrustment of dowry articles to Diwan Chand and five of his other relatives. From the statement, the learned Magistrate had concluded that the dowry articles must have been entrusted to the husband and probably to his parents also. The later part of the conclusion drawn by the learned Magistrate Is not supported by evidence. Litigation between the husband and wife started about 8 years after the marriage and it is more probable that all the articles of dowry had been taken charge of by the husband. So far as Diwan Chand petitioner-1 is concerned, no case for quashing of the impugned complaint is made out. Complaint against his parents, petitioners-2 and 3, being vague and even the allegations having not been established before the learned Magistrate, the summoning orde qua them is not justified. I hereby allow the criminal miscellaneous of Sardari Lal petitioner-2 and Smt. Swarna Rani petitioner-3 and quash the impuged complaint and all the consequesnt proceedings qua them. The criminal miscellaneous qua petitioner-1, however, stands dismissed.