G.S.CHAHAL,J - (1.) BANARSI Dass petitioner, father-in-law of the respondent Maya Devi has come with this petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of complaint Annexure P-1 order Annexure P-2 and all the consequent proceedings on basis of the complaint.
(2.) THE facts as may be gathered from the complaint Annexure P.1 filed by Maya Devi, under Sections 4, 6, 7 and 8 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') may be stated as under; The respondent was married to Devinder Kumar son of the petitioner, on April 19, 1979. At the time of the marriage articles of dowry were given to her as per list attached to the complaint. Devinder Kumar husband of the complainant respondent treated her with cruelty and ultimately she obtained a decree for divorce against him on 30th April, 1984. The articles of dowry were not returned to the complainant. She then approached the court for grant of maintenance under sections 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and was awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 250/- per month which amount was also not paid. The warrants of arrest were issued against Devinder Kumar but he being not available has since been declared proclaimed offender. The articles were still lying with the petitioner and in spite of the demand made he had not returned the same. Section 6 of the Act so far as relevant reads as follows; "6. Dowry to be for the benefit of the wife or her heirs:- 1) Where any dowry is received by any person other than the woman in connection with whose marriage it is given, that person shall transfer it to the woman- a) if the dowry was received before marriage, within three months after the date of marriage; or b) if the dowry was received at the time of or after the marriage, within three months after the date of its receipt; or c) if the dowry was received when the woman was minor, within one year after she has attained the age of eighteen years. and pending such transfer, shall hold it in trust for the benefit of the woman. 2) If any person fails to transfer any property as required by sub-section (1) within the time limit specified therefor or as required by sub-section (3) he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months, but which may extend to two years or with fine which shall not be less than five thousand rupees, but which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both." Since the allegations are that the dowry had been given at the time of the marriage, the complainant-respondent was entitled to recover back that dowry within three months from the date of the marriage and if the same was not handed over to her, an offence had been committed under section 6 of the Act which was punishable with imprisonment upto the period of two years. In view of the provisions of section 468 Cr.P.C. the complainant-respondent had three years limitation to bring the complaint for that offence. Earliest step taken by the complainant respondent was on 15th November, 1985, when she applied for obtaining sanction. By that time, however, her remedy for the prosecution of the Petitioner for the offence under the Act, stood barred by limitation.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent has urged that since the charge has been framed no quashing should be allowed. However, I am of the view that since the complaint cannot end in conviction on account of bar of limitation, the continuation of proceedings will amount to abuse of process of the court. I, hereby, allow this petition and quash the complaint Annexure P.1 order Annexure P.2 and all consequent proceedings.;