Surinder Katir vs State of Haryana

G.S. Chahal, J.

Smt. Surinder Kaur, along with Smt. Rajinder Kaur and Smt. Rajwinder Kaur, has come to this Court in this criminal miscellaneous under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing at the First Information Report No. 264 dated 2990, Annexure P1, for offences under section 498A/406 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station, Pehowa and consequential proceedings arising therefore.

The impugned FIR was registered on the statement of Smt. Paramjit Kaur. The allegations made therein may be briefly narrated.

Smt. Paramjit Kaur was married to Dilbagh Singh son of Gian Singh on 26 6.88. She stayed with him for 18 days. Thereafter the husband went to USA. She used to visit her inlaws. At the time of her marriage. her father had given her dowry in accordance with his status, but her fatherinlaw, her motherinlaw, Smt. Rave Kaur and her sistersinlaw Smt. Surinder Kaur, Rajinder Kaur and Smt. Rajwinder Kaur were not happy and they used to give her beating for bringing less dowry and also used to remark that her father had not given anything at the time of marriage. Her parentsinlaw told her that if she wanted to live at their house, she should bring Rs. 20,000/ from her father. She told them that her parents were not in a position to give such an amount. On return to her parents, she told them this fact. Her father approached her inlaws and save Rs. 20,000/ to them and left her there. Even then her parentsinlaw and sistersinlaw continued maltreating her. On 12490 her motherinlaw Smt. Ravel Kaur and her sisterinlaw Rajwinder Kaur gave her beating and turned her out of their house, saying that when Dilbagh Singh will come he will bring her. He husband came back from USA, but he did not come to take her to his house. She has now learnt that he has contracted a second marriage.

In the impugned FIR, no specific allegation of entrustment of the dowry articles to any of the present petitioners has been made. It is also common knowledge that such like dowry articles are entrusted to the bridgegroom or his parents and his sisters have hardly any role to play. Vague allegations of maltreatment are given in the impugned FIR. It is only with respect to the incident of 1241990 that specific allegation of giving her beating is mentioned.

In a criminal miscellaneous for quashing of the FIR, all the allegations have to be considered and it is to be seen if some offence is made out on the basis thereof. In case the allegations are vague, frivolous and vexatious, or made with the intention of wreaking vengeance then, of course, the FIR has to be quashed. In the present case, no specific allegations have been made against Smt. Surinder Kaur and Smt. Rajinder Kaur and their names have been added for the reason that they happened to be the sisters of Dilbagh Singh who had unfortunately deserted Smt. Paramjit Kaur, his wife. A conclusion is to be drawn that the prosecution of these two petitioners is for an oblique motive. The continuation of the proceedings against them amounts to abuse of process of the Court.

I hereby allow the criminal miscellaneous qua Smt. Surinder Kaur and Smt. Rajinder Kaur and quash the impugned FIR and all the subsequent proceeding''s against them but dismiss the same qua Smt. Rajwinder Kaur.

JUDGMENT accordingly