HARCHARAN KAUR AND OTHERS; HARVINDAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER
LAWS(UTN)-2013-7-134
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on July 10,2013

Harcharan Kaur And Others; Harvindar Singh Appellant
VERSUS
State of Uttarakhand and another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) A criminal complaint case was filed by respondent Ramit Kaur against the accused persons / applicants for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 498A of IPC and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. After the statements under Sections 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C., accused persons / applicants were summoned to face the trial for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 498A of IPC and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, vide order dated 17.10.2008, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar. Aggrieved against said order, present applications under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. were filed.
(2.) It was stated in the complaint that complainant / respondent no. 2 Ramit Kaur was married to accused Harvindar Singh on 08.12.2004, according to the customs of Sikh religion. The parents and brothers of the complainant gifted valuable items in the marriage, but in spite of the same, the husband, motherin-law, father-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law of the complainant demanded Rs. 2,00,000/- and a car in dowry. The said demand was made after few days of the marriage. When the parents of the complainant declined the same, the complainant was ill-treated and harassed by her husband and in-laws. On 23.06.2006, a son was begotten out of the wedlock of Ramit Kaur and Harvindar Singh. On 19.07.2008, Ramit Kaur was assaulted and ousted, alongwith her son, from the matrimonial home. The complainant informed her brother, called him at Pilibhit, and went with him to Khatima. On 22.08.2008, at 06:00 P.M., the husband, mother-in-law, father-in-law and brother-in-law of the complainant came to her parental home. They were treated well. After sometime, the accused persons tried to snatch and take away the son of the complainant. Complainant resisted, as a result of which the accused persons assaulted the complainant with kicks and fists. The husband of the complainant assaulted the complainant with stick. Complainant raised an alarm. Neighbours Amita Kaur, Manjeet Kaur and complainant's brother Harpreet Singh intervened and saved the complainant and her son from the clutches of the accused persons. The accused persons went from the parental home of the complainant, but threatened her with dire consequences and also threatened her for divorce. They also threatened the complainant that her son Yash will be taken out from her custody.
(3.) The complaint version was supported by the complainant under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. Harpreet Singh, Amita Kaur and Manjeet Kaur also supported complaint story in their statements under Section 202 of Cr.P.C. The injury report as well as the applications addressed to Station Officer, Khatima and Sr. Superintendent of Police were also filed alongwith the complaint. Having found a prima facie case against the accused persons, they were summoned to face the trial.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.