Pardeep Kumar and ors. vs State of Punjab

G.S. Chahal, J.

Pardeep Kumar petitioner1, along with his father Baldev Krishan petitioner 2, mother Smt. Santosh Rani petitioner 3 and brother Ashok Kumar petitioner 4, have brought this criminal miscellaneous under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code for quashing of the complaint Annexure P1 and the proceedings arising therefrom under Sections 406/498A read with Section 120B IPC.

Smt Anjana Sharma, respondent No. 2 is the wife of Pardeep Kumar petitioner1. The facts alleged by the complainant respondent may briefly be enumerated.

Smt. Anjana Sharma, respondent was married to petitioner 1 on 10121986 at Ludhiana. They cohabited, but no child was born. At the time of marriage, it was a condition precedent that the dowry, as per demand of the petitioners, would be given to the complainant. Articles, mentioned in AnnexuresA to the complaint, were given in dowry by her parents, with a direction that the same shall be handed over to her. However, this condition was not complied with Petitioner 1 and his parents were greedy people and they treated her with utmost cruelty. She was taunted humiliated and insulted for not bringing proper dowry. At the instance of Smt. Santosh Rani petitioner 3 her husband used to give her cruel treatment. She was not even property fed. About a month after the marriage a demand for Rs. 10000/ cash, a colour TV gold set and furniture was made. She was then maltreated for not meeting that demand. She was then maltreated for not meeting that demand. She was turned out of the house. She narrated the facts to her parents and stayed at her parents house for one month. She was then sent, along with a sum of Rs. 2,000/, but she was again turned out and after staying for five months at her parents'' house, she returned with a sum of Rs. 3,000/. Even this payment did not satisfy her in laws. She then sent a letter to her parents, complaining about cruel treatment. On receipt of that letter her brother Krishan Lal apprehend her in laws with a request that she may be properly treated. They, however, refused to entertain that request. In March 1988, she was brought by her brother to her parents'' house. Efforts were then, again made for her rehabilitation by the Panchayat but the same failed.. An application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was then filed by her against her husband. Therein also, on one of the dates she again made a demand for the return of her dowry, but her husband petitioner 1 refused to do so.

So far as Ashok Kumar petitioner 4 is concerned, no specific allegation either about entrustment of dowry or cruel treatment has been made against him. The marriage of Smt Anjana Sharma having gone to rocks she has tried to implicate all the relatives of her husband to wreak vengeance. By a general allegation that other relatives of petitioner 1 had also joined in treating her crually, she has tried to implicate petitioner 4 also. Normally, a brother has little say in the marital affairs of his brother and sister in law. It is only the parents and the husband who are involved with respect to the demand for dowry and receiving the same. The prosecution of Ashok Kumar, petitioner 4 is thus clearly for an oblique motive. I accept the criminal miscellaneous qua him and quash the impugned complaint and other proceedings.

Petitioner I and his parents petitioner 2 and 3 were obviously involved in the matter of demand of dowry and receiving the same and also with respect to the treatment meted out to respondent 2 during her stay at the matrimonial home. Truthfulness or otherwise with respect to these charges has to be assessed on the basis of evidence that may be led in the trial Court. No case is made out for quashing the impugned proceeding qua them. The criminal miscellaneous stands dismissed.

I have considered the request of the learned counsel and accept that petitioners 2 and 3, being aged people, should be exempted from personal appearance during the trial. A direction, is thus, issued that on the next date of hearing in the trial Court, on moving of a proper application by them 21/2 the Magistrate shall exempt them from personal appearance and they may appear through their counsel till their presence is required for a particular purpose.

JUDGMENT accordingly.