Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rishav Dev Shastri And Another vs State Of Punjab And Another on 18 July, 2013
Author: Sabina
Bench: Sabina
Crl. Misc. No. M-6219 of 2010 (O&M) -1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl. Misc. No. M-6219 of 2010 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 18.7.2013.
Rishav Dev Shastri and another ........Petitioners
Vs.
State of Punjab and another ......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr. K.S.Sidhu, Senior Advocate with
Mr. A.S.Sandhu, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Ms. Harsimrat Rai, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Rajiv Kataria, Advocate for
Mr. Heman Aggarwal, Advocate
for respondent No. 2
.....
SABINA, J.
Petitioners have filed this petition under 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Cr.P.C.' for short) challenging the order dated 17.9.2009 whereby they were ordered to be summoned to face the trial as additional accused on an application moved by the prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
Learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners were residing separately from their son. In fact, petitioners had disowned their son Padam Dev. No fresh material had been led during trial to show the involvement of the petitioners in the crime.
Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No. 2, on the other hand, have opposed the petition. Singh Gurpreet 2013.07.29 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M-6219 of 2010 (O&M) -2 -
Section 319 Cr.P.C. reads as under:-
"Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence:-
(1) Where, in the course of any inquiry into, or trial of, an offence, it appears from the evidence that any person not being the accused has committed any offence for which such person could be tried together with the accused, the Court may proceed against such person for the offence which he appears to have committed.
(2) Where such person is not attending the Court, he may be arrested or summoned, as the circumstances of the case may require, for the purpose aforesaid.
(3) Any person attending the Court although not under arrest or upon a summons, may be detained by such Court for the purpose of the inquiry into, or trial of, the offence which he appears to have committed.
(4) Where the Court proceeds against any person under sub-section (1), then-
(a) the proceedings in respect of such person
shall be commenced afresh, and
witnesses re-heard.
(b) subject to the provisions of clause (a), the
case may proceed as if such person had
been an accused person when the Court
took cognizance of the offence upon
Singh Gurpreet
2013.07.29 16:10
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No. M-6219 of 2010 (O&M) -3 -
which the inquiry or trial was
commenced."
Thus, as per the above provision, the trial court may summon any person to face the trial as an accused if there is sufficient material available against the said person during trial to proceed against him.
It has been held by the Apex Court in case Suman Vs. State of Rajasthan and another, (2010) 1 Supreme Court Cases 250 as under:-
"A reading of the plain language of Section 319(1) CrPC makes it clear that a person not already an accused in a case can be proceeded against if in the course of any inquiry into or trial of an offence it appears from the evidence that such person has also committed any offence and deserves to be tried with other accused. There is nothing in the language of Section 319(1) CrPC from which it can be inferred that a person who is named in the FIR or complaint but against whom charge sheet is not filed by the police, cannot be proceeded against even though in the course of any inquiry into or trial of any offence the court finds that such person has committed any offence for which he could be tried together with the other accused."
"The process issued against the appellant under Section 319 CrPC cannot be quashed only on the ground that even though she was named in the complaint, the police did not file charge-sheet against her. A person who is named in the FIR or complaint Singh Gurpreet 2013.07.29 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M-6219 of 2010 (O&M) -4 - with the allegation that he/she has committed any particular crime or offence, but against whom the police does not launch prosecution or files charge- sheet or drops the case, can be proceeded against under Section 319 CrPC if from the evidence collected/produced in the course of any inquiry into or trial of an offence, the court is prima facie satisfied that such person has committed any offence for which he can be tried with other accused."
"The Magistrate had objectively considered the entire matter and judiciously exercised discretion under Section 319 CrPC for taking cognizance against the appellant. The issue of summons against the appellant was not an abuse of the process of the court. While deciding the application filed under Section 319 CrPC, the Magistrate noticed the allegations made by respondent No.2 in the complaint that her mother-in-law and sister-in-law had castigated her for insufficient dowry and subjected her to physical and mental harassment and that the sister-in-law had instigated the complainant's husband to inflict physical torture upon her, which were supported by the statements recorded by the police under Section 161 CrPC and by the Magistrate under Section 164 CrPC. In her complaint Respondent No.2 alleged that after one week of the marriage, her mother-in-law and sister-in-law (the appellant) told her that in the marriage, items like scooter, fridge, air conditioner, etc. were not given and the marriage party was not served well and that Singh Gurpreet 2013.07.29 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M-6219 of 2010 (O&M) -5 - on the instigations of the mother-in-law and the appellant sister-in-law, the husband gave beating with the belan, and the appellant forcibly removed the rings."
"The complainant clearly spelt out the role played by the appellant and made a specific mention about this in the letters written to her parents and the Magistrate opined that a prima facie case was made out for issuing process against the appellant. The father and mother of respondent No.2 and four other persons, whose statements were recorded under Section 161 CrPC, clearly spelt out the role played by the appellant in harassing Respondent No.2 and instigating the complainant's husband to inflict torture upon her. Despite this, the police did not file charge-sheet against the appellant thinking that she had no occasion to make demand of dowry or harass Respondent No.2 because the appellant was living with her husband. Therefore, the trial of the appellant should proceed and should be decided expeditiously"
"The High Court broadly referred to the factual matrix of the case and held that the orders passed by the Magistrate and Sessions Judge did not suffer from any illegality or perversity warranting interference under Section 482 CrPC. The approach adopted by the High Court is in consonance with the settled law. Although at one stage, the Sessions Judge allowed the revision filed by the appellant and declared that in view of the bar of limitation contained in Section 468 Singh Gurpreet 2013.07.29 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M-6219 of 2010 (O&M) -6 - CrPC, the Magistrate could not have taken cognizance against the appellant, the said order was set aside by the High Court and the matter was remitted for fresh disposal of the revision petition. In the post remand order passed by him, the Sessions Judge independently examined the entire record and held that prima facie case was made out for initiating proceedings against the appellant herein under Section 498-A IPC."
The Trial Court, while allowing the application moved by the prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.C., has held as under:-
"I have heard the ld. APP for the State and have gone through the file very carefully. Rupali Bhanot while appearing as PW1 has deposed that her parents were in search of a suitably match for her and the name of Padam Dev Shastri was suggested to be a proper match for her. She and Padam Dev Shastri had seen each other, signified their approval for marriage, ring ceremony was performd on 18.3.1999 at Jang Ghar Model Town, Ludhiana on the asking of accused Padam Dev Shastri, Rishav Dev Shastri and Mohini Shastri. She further deposed that as per the demand of accused, a gold chain weighing about 1-1/2 tolas, gold ring weighing one tola and Rs. 51000/- in cash and two summer suits were entrusted to Padam Dev Shastri, one gold ring weightin one tola and cash Rs. 11000/- were entrusted to Rishav Dev Shastri, one gold Singh Gurpreet 2013.07.29 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M-6219 of 2010 (O&M) -7 - set weighing 4 tolas and Rs. 5000/- in cash besides three lady suits were entrusted to the abovesaid accused for delivering the same to her on reaching their house after marriage. She further deposed that thereafter, her marriage was performed as per Hindu rites on 10.10.1999 at Dhawan Palace, Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana with Padam Dev Shastri and during the marriage, her parents entrusted one double bed, two sarees, four gold sets weighing 18 tolas, two gold karas weighing three tolas, six gold bangles weighing 6 tolas, one nose ring weighing one tola, one tikka weighing one tola to Mohini Rishi, one gold ring weighing one tola, five blankets, five double bed sheets, one saree, 11 suits to Rishav Dev Shastri, one gold chain weighing two tolas, one gold kara weighing tolas, Rs. 2 lacs in cash and four suits to Padam Dev Shastri. She further deposed that as she was in bridal dress, so she could not keep the said articles and the entrusted had therefore been made as such and the abovesaid articles were entrusted to the accused to be delivered to her on demand. She further deposed that on reaching house of in laws, Rishav Dev Shastri, father in law gave 7 gold bangles weighing 7 tolas, two gold sets weighing 10 tolas, two pair rings weighing 3 tolas, one long chain weighing 3 tolas to her, which she entrusted to Padav Dev Shastri for keeping the same in safe custody and to be delivered to her or whenever she Singh Gurpreet demands. She further deposed that on the first fera, 2013.07.29 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M-6219 of 2010 (O&M) -8 - Padam Dev Shastri was given Rs. 11000/- in cash besides two suits and she was given Rs. 5100/- and two suits and the same were entruted to Mohini Rishi for keeping the same in safe custody. She further deposed that on Karva chauth Rs. 10000/- were given to her by her father, which were also entrusted by her to her husband and on Diwali Rs. 15000/- were given in cash besides fruits, sweeks and two shirts, which were entrusted by her to Rishav Dev Shastri for safe custody and all the said articles constitute her istri dhan. She further deposed that after about one week of the marriage, all the accused started exhibiting dissatisfaction over the articles given in the marriage and demand of Rs. 5 lacs was made. She further deposed that her father having spent considrable amount even beyond his means and he was not in a position to give Rs. 5 lacs, which was demanded by the above said accused, as a result of which, she was used to be subjected to severe beatings and filthy abuses were hurled to her and her life was made a hell and she was not allowed to have proper food in the house and was made to work hard in the family. She further deposed that even Rohit, brother of Padam Dev Shastri also joined the said accused in practicing cruelty to her. She further deposed that even during advance pregnancy, the accused tortured physically and mentally and on 17.2.2001, a son namely Chirag was Singh Gurpreet born at Life Line Hospital, who was also not properly 2013.07.29 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M-6219 of 2010 (O&M) -9 - looked after by the accused. She further deposed that as her parents could not fulfill the demand of Rs. 5 lacs, she and life of her minor child was made a hell. She further deposed that she came to know that her husband Padam Dev Shastri had married with one Sikha Mehta and was keepig her as a second wife and the photographs and negatives also came in her hands of Sikha Mehta and Padav Dev Shastri and when she raised protest regarding the photographs of Shikha Mehta and her husband regarding second marriage, she was mercilessly beaten and was turned out from the house of in laws on 25.3.2003 after givin severe beatings by her husband and her mother in law, after keeping the minor child by the accused. She further deposed that the above said accused also raised the demand of Rs. 5 lacs. She further deposed that thereafter, she filed an application on 31.3.2003 before the police seeking custody of her child, but her child was being unlawfully kept by them. She further deposed that she was turned out from the matrimonial house on 25.3.2003 in three clothes and compelled to live in the parental house. She further deposed that she demanded her istridhan from the accused, but they flatly refused to return the same, rather threatened that they will put her life to an end. She further deposed that all the abovesaid accused have joined hands with each other in furtherance and to cause wrongful loss to Singh Gurpreet her and the abovesaid accused caused mental as well 2013.07.29 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M-6219 of 2010 (O&M) -10 - as physical cruelty and they further made demand of Rs. 5 lacs from her and the above said accused misappropriated my istridhan and they still are using her istridhan. She further deposed that they flatly refused to return her istridhan and in this regard, she made a complaint Ex. PA before the police, on the basis of which an enquiry was conducted and her statement was also recorded during enquiry which is Ex. PB. List of dowry articles is Ex. PC. Marriage Card is Ex. PD, the photographs of her marriage are Ex. PE and Ex. PF and photographs of her husband and Shikha are Ex. P1 to Ex. P11, the bills of jewellery is Ex. PG and Ex. PH.
The main accused Padam Dev Shastri is proclaimed offender in this case. Since from the evidence of PW1 Rupali Bhanot, it appears that accused Rishav Dev Shastri and Mohini Rishi have also harassed and maltreated Rupali Bhanot and also misappropriated her istridhan and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 406/498-A IPC. As such, they are liable to be tried alongwith the main accused. Accordingly, they are ordered to be summoned in this case for 11.11.2009 to face trial u/s 406, 498-A IPC."
The reasons given by the Trial Court while ordering the summoning of the petitioners to face the trial as additional accused are sound reasons. There was enough material before the Trial Court to proceed against the petitioners. Complainant has levelled serious allegations against the petitioners with Singh Gurpreet 2013.07.29 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M-6219 of 2010 (O&M) -11 - regard to harassment and maltreatment meted out to her by the petitioners and their son on account of demand of dowry.
No ground for interference is made out. Dismissed.
(SABINA) JUDGE July 18, 2013 Gurpreet Singh Gurpreet 2013.07.29 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh