Raj Kaur alias Raji vs Jangir Singh

G.S. Chahal, J.

Raj Kaur alias Raji, petitioner has come in this criminal miscellaneous under Sec. 482, Cr. PC for quashing of the complaint dated 23790 under Secs. 406, 420, 498A and 506, read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Annexure P1 and the summoning order dated 6291 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sirsa, Annexure P2. The complaint was brought by the respondent against the petitioner & ors.

According to the averments made in the impugned complaint, Ranjit Kaur alias Rajinder Kaur is the daughter of the respondent. She was married to Gurmit Singh accused on 17121989. The petitioner is sister. The dowry articles, as detailed in the list annexed to the complaint, had been entrusted to the petitioner and his other relatives arrayed as accused therein. Gurmit Singh and his relatives were persons of mean mentality. They used to taunt her for bringing inadequate dowry and raise demands for more articles of dowry. In January 1990, she was turned out of her matrimonial home after giving beating. Parents of Gurmit Singh threatened that in case she wanted rehabilitation in their house, she should bring a scooter and colour TV. She then returned to her parents house. Efforts were made to bring about a reconciliation and her resettlement at her inlaws'' house, but in vain. The dowry articles had been retained for being given in dowry to the petitioner herein. In spite of demand made, the dowry has not been returned to her.

The petitioner, his brother and parents, accused1 to 4 in the complaint, were summoned by the Magistrate vide the impugned summoning order.

The petitioner has placed on record a copy of petition filed by Ranjit Kaur alias Rajinder Kaur under Sec. 13, Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of her marriage with Gurmit Singh, accused. In paragraph 3 thereof, it has been alleged that Gurmit Singh and his parents were selfish and greedy persons. They had been openly taunting her about the dowry. On refusal to meet their further demands, she was given beating by Gurmit Singh in presence of his parents. However, no allegation against the petitioner herein was made in the matrimonial petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioner urges that the complaint in question has been brought with an oblique motive for wreaking vengeance against Gurmit Singh and his other family members, as his marriage with Ranjit Kaur alias Rajinder Kaur has failed. The petitioner was a minor girl at the time of her marriage with Gurmit Singh. The allegation of entrustment of dowry articles is not only vague, but also incredible. Although Ranjit Kaur had levelled allegations against her husband and his parents, in the petition for divorce no such allegations were made against the present petitioner. She has now been implicated with the soleobject of seeking vengeance against the whole family.

Sh. R.S. Randhawa, Advocate appearing for the respondent, urges that only the complaint should be examined for deciding, whether an offence is made out or not. A reference to the conduct of Gurmit Singh''s parents in the matrimonial petition, was only in the form of a narrative giving the sequence of facts, but it did not contain all the allegations and the case against the petitioner cannot be distinguished from that of her brother and parents.

The legal proposition that in proceedings under Sec. 482, Cr. PC, only the complaint or FIR, as the case may be, is to be examined and it is to be found out if it discloses an offence cannot be disputed. In an appropriate case, however, the relevant facts and circumstances and other material which are before the Court, can also be examined for reaching a satisfactory conclusion if the prosecution has been launched with an oblique motive and for causing unnecessary harassment to an individual. This view derives support from the observations made in State of West Bengal & ors. v. Swapan Kumar Guha & ors., AIR 1982 SC 949. If the narrative in her matrimonial petition was only meant to give the context in which she was harassed by her husband and in laws, she would have definitely referred to the part played by the present petitioner, if, in fact, she had performed some part of the like nature. It is difficult to accept the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that only a part of the sequence of harassment and beatings was disclosed in the matrimonial petition. That petition forms a part of the record and is admissible in evidence per se. It is, thus, a relevant material to be considered for reaching a conclusion if the present proceedings have been brought with an oblique motive.

In paragraph 8 of the impugned complaint, the allegation made is that the dowry articles, entrusted to the accusedpersons, had been kept by them (for being given in dowry to Ranjit Kaur alias Raji, accused). In view of the averments made, the articles of dowry will be with the persons other than the present petitioner. If the petitioner is already possessed of the same, there is no occasion for her parents and, brother to give the same to her in marriage as dowry.

On the basis of the above conclusion, it is held that the impugned complaint against the present petitioner has been brought with an oblique motive and for causing harassment not only to her but also her brother and parents, accused therein. The continuation of these proceedings amounts to abuse of process of the Court. The criminal miscellaneous is accepted and the impugned complaint, the summoning order of the Magistrate and subsequent proceedings thereon, so far it relates to the present petitioner, stand quashed.

JUDGMENT accordingly.