Kuldeep Kaur and Others vs State of Punjab and Another

Rekha Mittal, J.—The present petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ""the Code"") has been filed seeking quashing of

FIR No. 62 dated 11.6.2012 for offence under Sections 420, 498-A, 406, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (for short ""IPC""), registered at Police

Station Arniwala, District Fazilka and proceedings emanating therefrom. Counsel for the petitioners contends that Kuldeep Kaur petitioner No. 1

was married to Sarabjit Singh, husband of complainant Paramjeet Kaur (respondent No. 2 herein) but marriage of Kuldeep Kaur and Sarabjit

Singh resulted in divorce by a decree passed by the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Malout on 15.2.2010 (Annexure P-2). It is

further submitted that subsequent to dissolution of marriage of Kuldeep Kaur, she has nothing to do with the domestic affairs of Sarabjit Singh and

the complainant. Petitioners No. 2 and 3 are the parents of Kuldeep Kaur. Paramjeet Kaur complainant has not levelled any allegations against

them in regard to demand of dowry or subjecting her to maltreatment in connection with the said demand. It is further argued that a compromise

was effected between Paramjeet Kaur and Sarabjit Singh whereby they have decided to severe their ties as husband and wife and leaving each

other at liberty to perform another marriage, as per document (Annexure P-3). The last submission made by counsel is that criminal proceedings

initiated against the petitioners are nothing but abuse and misuse of process of law.

Counsel representing the State of Punjab has nothing to dispute in regard to no role being attributed to petitioners No. 2 and 3, parents of earlier

wife of Sarabjit Singh. However, it is submitted that the complainant has levelled specific allegations against Kuldeep Kaur-petitioner No. 1 by

stating that the first wife of her husband has come to his house, harassing her illegally and demanding dowry and extending threats.

Paramjeet Kaur respondent was represented by Mr. Yogesh Gupta, Advocate, but he is not present in the Court to make submissions.

I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the records.

A perusal of averments set up in the first information report (Annexure P-1) would reveal that no allegations have been levelled by the

complainant against petitioners No. 2 and 3, who are parents of Kuldeep Kaur petitioner No. 1, the earlier wife of Sarabjit Singh. The first

information report also makes reference that the earlier wife of Sarabjit Singh obtained divorce in the Court and Sarabjit Singh has no concern with

her. This apart, it is difficult to believe that parents of Kuldeep Kaur could either demand any dowry or indulge in act of cruelty in connection with

the said demand. There is nothing on record to suggest that Gurmeet Singh and Veero Bai could have possession of any articles of STRIDHAN

belonging to the complainant. However, the complainant has raised allegations against Kuldeep Kaur that she has come back to the house of her

husband and caused cruelty in connection with demand of dowry.

Keeping in view the allegations in the FIR, no case is made out against petitioners No. 2 and 3, thus, it is expedient in the interest of justice that

petitioners No. 2 and 3 are not subject to rigmarole of criminal proceedings and the same are quashed. For the reasons recorded hereinabove, the

petition is partly allowed. FIR No. 62 dated 11.6.2012 and proceedings emanating therefrom are ordered to be quashed qua petitioners Gurmeet

Singh and Veero Bai.