Vipin Kumar vs State of Haryana

Harmohinder Kaur Sandhu, J.

The present petition has been filed under section 483 of the Criminal Procedure Code by Vipin Kumar and others for quashing the first information report No. 367 dated 16.5.1991 under section 304B I.P.C. registered at Police Station, City Karnal.

The facts of the case are that Vipin Kumar was married to Meenakshi deceased, daughter of Kalyan Chand respondent No. 2 on 12.12.1990. Meenakshi revealed to the petitioners that before her marriage, she was getting treatment from Dr. Bhalla of Karnal for mental ailment. On account of this mental illness she often quarrelled with the petitioners on minor issues. Sometimes she sent objectionable messages to her parents. On 11.4.1991 parents of Meenakshi came with the police and took her with them. A report was recorded in the daily diary register of the police station regarding this incident. On 16.5.1991 Meenakshi died at the residence of her maternal uncle at Karnal but father of the deceased got a case registered under section 304B I. P. C. against the petitioners. The petitioners alleged that the first information report did not reveal that they had played any role in compelling Meenakshi to end her life. In fact she committed suicide as she was not properly looked after by her parents and also on account of her mental illness. There was in fact no definite evidence that Meenakshi had committed suicide. She had fallen from the roof and after the alleged fall she was not taken to any Government Hospital and was rather taken to a private nursing home, which caused suspicion regarding her committing suicide.

In reply to the petition respondent No. 2 contended that after the marriage of petitioner No. 1 with Meenakshi all the petitioners started harassing the deceased for bringing inadequate dowry and the demand for more and more dowry increased day by day. When the situation became intolerable the deceased informed her parents and respondent No. 2 had to take the assistance of the police to recover her. A report was lodged at Police Station Mohali vide D.D.R. No. 22 dated 11.4.1991 whereby Meenakshi informed th police that she wanted to go with her parents because her inlaw harassed her. The deceased was compelled to commit suicide on account of cruel treatment meted out to her at the hands of the petitioners.

I have heard the counsel for the parties.

It was argued on behalf of the petitioners that on 11. 4.1991 Meenakshi had left the house of the petitioners and had gone to her parental house. She committed suicide on 16.5.1991 at Karnal at the house of her maternal uncle None of the petitioners was present at that time. Harassment, if any, ceased to exist as soon as the petitioner deceased left with her parents. The case registered against the petitioners under section 304B I. P. C. was, thus an abuse of the process of the Court. The petitioners were not even remotely connected with the act of the deceased whereby she put an end to her life.

It was urged on behalf of the respondents that at this stage when the cases is under investigation truthfulness of the allegations cannot be gone into and the only question to be seen is whether a prima facie case is made out against the petitioners. The learned counsel relied upon the case of Murari Lal and others v. State of Haryana, 1991(2) R.C.R.(Criminal) 83 : 1991(1) Cur.L.J. 507 : 1991(2) R.C. 83 where in a case under section 498A I.P.C. the complainant wife had made allegations of harassment, beating and torture. It was held that truthfulness of these allegations cannot be gone into in proceedings under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the F.I.R.

A perusal of the impugned first information report shows that there are specific allegations regarding harassment of Meenakshi by the petitioners who pressed for scooter, coloured television and other articles. It is also recorded that Meenakshi ended her life by jumping from the roof as she was harassed by the petitioners for not bringing adequate dowry. In the case of Kurukshetra University and another v. State of Haryana and another, A.I.R. 1977 Supreme Court 2229 the Apex Court observed :

"Inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the High Court to act according to whim or caprice. That statutory power has to be exercised sparingly, with circumspection. Thus, the High Court in exercise of inherent powers under section 482, Criminal P.C. cannot quash a first information report, more so when the police had not even commenced the investigation and no proceeding at all is pending in any Court in pursuance of the said F.I.R."

From the allegations made in the impugned first information report a primafacie case is made out against the petitioners. The question regarding the truthfulness or falsity of the allegations will be determined by the trial Court where petitioners will have an opportunity to produce their defence. There is no merit in this petition and the same is hereby dismissed.