Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kulwinder And Ors. vs Asha Rani on 13 February, 2002
Equivalent citations: II(2002)DMC52
Author: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel
JUDGMENT Adarsh Kumar Goel, J.
1. The petitioners herein are the sisters of one Om Parkash who was married to Asha Rani, complainant on 20.2.1992. Asha Rani lodged an F.I.R. on 21.8.1998 alleging that her parents had given various dowry items which were stridhan of the complainant, which had been misappropriated, and the husband and his relatives had subjected the complainant to cruelty. The First Information Report under Sections 498-A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered and after investigation, the challan has been filed the Court against the husband and his parents while the three petitioners who were the sisters of the husband, were exonerated and kept in Column No. 2. The complainant filed an application that the three petitioners who had been exonerated by the investigating agency, be summoned to face trial. The Trial Court observed that there were specific allegations against the three petitioners also, in the form of demand of dowry and giving beatings and, therefore, the three petitioners be also summoned to face trial.
2. This petition alleges that all the three petitioners were minor at the time of marriage of their brother Om Parkash. Various documents have been filed on the record to substantiate this point. The complainant contested the matter and stated that the petitioners were not minor at the time of marriage.
3. It is well settled that the Court does not examine the defence of the accused for the purpose of deciding a petition for quashing. I, therefore, do not examine the question of the age of the petitioners at this stage.
4. There is, however, a tendency to involve all the relatives of the husband when relations between the husband and the wife become strained. The object of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to ensure that process of the Court is not abused. Admittedly, all the three petitioners were unmarried sisters of the husband. There can, therefore, be no question of misappropriation of stridhan of the complainant by them. Unless there is some material to show this, it is against the interest of justice to make the unmarried sisters of the husband to face allegations of misappropriation of stridhan or harassment for dowry on vague allegations. The investigating agency has exonerated them. Though there can be no inflexible rule, it has been repeatedly held that it is not safe to permit prosecution of all the relatives of the husband.
5. In the statement of the complainant, which was treated as F.I.R., it is alleged that at the time of engagement, parents of the complainant gave certain dowry items and on the marriage day also, certain dowry items were given out of which, it is alleged, that a Cooler was given to Vidya, a Sewing Machine was given to Seema and a Mixi was given to Kulwinder. When all the dowry articles taking it as stridhan were handed over to husband or his father, there is no occasion of a Cooler or Mixi or Sewing Machine being given separately to the three unmarried sisters as a trust property to be restored to the bride of which misappropriation may have taken place at their instance. These allegations have been made merely to implicate the unmarried sisters of the husband with a view to harass them on account of their relationship with the husband.
Having regard to the nature of the allegations and the circumstances of the case, I am of the view that proceedings against the petitioners are required to be quashed. Order accordingly.