SHIV KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure relates to quashment of criminal complaint filed by Veena Rani, respondent No.2, the summoning order dated 22-11-1988, and further proceedings taken on the basis of the said compliant.

(2.) According to the allegations in the complaint, marriage between Veena Rani and her husband Harish Kumar was solemnized on 29-5-1985 at Ludhiana according to Hindu rites, Out of the said wedlock one daughter namely Dimpi was born on 12-4-1986 who is residing with the complainant. It was further pleaded that at the time of solemnization of the marriage articles mentioned in Anneure. A which constituted Istri-Dhan of the complainant were entrusted to all the accused (including the present petitioners) with a clear understanding that the same will be handed over to the complainant on teaching her matrimonial home. The accused who are greedy persons and were not satisfied with the articles of dowry started coercing the complainant wife in order to extract morel dowry and valuable articles. It was further alleged that in the month of June and July 1985 all die accused directed, the complainant to bring VCR, Scooter and Rs. 50,000/- ill cash from her parents, but the complainant refused to do so. All the accused mal-treated and gave her beatings on several occasions. She was not provided with food and mal-treated with the sole aim of harassing her and also pressurising her for, extracting the aforesaid articles including item of cash from the parents of the complainant. The accused in pursuance of their conspiracy took the complainant in a jeep in the month of December, 1985 and left her in front of the house of her parents inspite of the fact that delivery had to take place in the month of April, 1986. On 12-4-1986 the complainant gave birth to a female child but the behaviour of the accused was too inhuman & callous that they never came and cared to enquire about the health of the complainant and infant child. On, a telephonic message all the accused reached Ludhiana and started quarrelling with the complainant and her father. They again repeated their demand as indicated above. The father of the complainant showed his inability to fulfill the demands of the accused party. The father of the complainant and other relations assured the accused to fulfill their demands. On this assurance the complainant and her daughter Dimple were brought by the accused to Jalandhar. Thereafter when the demands of the accused were not fulfilled by the father of be complainant, the complainant and her minor daughter were dropped by them in front of house of her father and they again repeated demands of scooter, VCR and cash of Rs. 50,000/-.

(3.) Counsel for the parties were heard. It was rightly submitted on behalf of the counsel for the petitioners that there are no specific allegations concerning entrustment of specific articles of dowry to any specific accused.