- (1.) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr. P. C. seeking quashing of the complaint No. 27/4 dated 15.11.2006 filed under Sections 406, 498-A, 323/34 IPC (Annexure P-4), summoning order dated 6.7.2009 (Annexure P-6) as well as the order dated 1.11.2010 (Annexure P- 7) whereby the revision petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana.
(2.) Briefly stated, respondent No. 1 Amninderpaul Kaur filed a complaint against the petitioners and others under Section 406, 498-A, 323, 34 IPC (Annexure P-4) wherein they have been summoned vide order dated 6.7.2009 (Annexure P-6) and the revision petition preferred by them against the summoning order has been dismissed vide order dated 1.11.2010 (Annexure P-7). The brief facts of the case are that respondent No. 1 was married to brother of petitioner No. 1 on 19.2.2006. At the time of marriage, no dowry articles were given nor a demand was raised from the family of respondent No. 1. Petitioner No. 1 was studying in M. Sc. Industrial Chemistry in May 2007 in Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. She remained in hostel from July 2005 to 2007. Petitioner No. 2 is the mediator to the marriage between Amrinderpal Kaur respondent No. 1 and Milandeep Singh, one of the accused in the complaint. Due to temperamental differences, she used to pick up quarrel with her husband and used to go to her parents house. It is alleged that the marriage between Milandeep Singh and respondent No. 1 Amninderpal Kaur was a simple marriage. Even the expenses of the marriage were incurred by the father and the mother of the petitioner. The father of respondent No. 1 is working as an Electrician in Punjab Roadways Workshop, Ludhiana. Respondent No. 1 was doing Diploma in Sewing from IGNOU at village Bullepur near Khanna and was pressurizing her husband to shift to Khanna. In order to attend her classes of the said course, respondent No. 1 used to leave Ludhiana every Monday and return in the evening of Friday. Even the pocket money was given by the parents of petitioner No. 1. It is alleged in the petition that on 10.7.2006, respondent No. 1 left for Khanna as a routine to attend the classes and took away all jewellry and clothes and thereafter refused to come back.
(3.) Thereafter, an attempt was made to bring her back but her family refused to send her back. The brother of respondent No. 1 gave beating to the brother of petitioner No. 1 and the matter was registered at Police Station Sadar Khanna but it was ultimately compromised. The complaint and the compromise are Annexures P-1 and P-2 respectively on the paper book. Due to the fact that the complaint was lodged against the brother of respondent No. 1, they further lodged a false and frivolous application against the parents of petitioner No. 1 before the SSP Khanna and during the course of enquiry, none from the family of respondent No. 1 appeared nor the complainant appeared. Ultimately the complaint was declared as false. The report of the Investigating Officer is Annexure P-3. Thereafter, the complainant had filed a complaint Annexure P-4 wherein the petitioners along with other were summoned (Annexure P-6). Against their summoning, the petitioners herein filed a revision petition which was dismissed vide order Annexure P-7. Hence, this petition.;