Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 162 (PNJ)

Shinder Pal @ Kakke v. State of Haryana

2004-02-12

VIRENDER SINGH

body2004
JUDGMENT Virender Singh, J. - Shinder Pal alias Kakke, daughter of Budh Ram, aged 18 years, an unmarried sister-in-law of Babli alias Kashmiri-complainant seeks the quashing of FIR No. 209 dated 28.12.2002 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 498-A/4-6/506/34 Indian Penal Code registered at police station Jakhal, Tehsil Tohana, District Fatehabad as also the further proceedings arising therefrom qua her. 2. Notice of motion was issued to Advocate General, Haryana (respondent No. 1) only and reply has been filed. 3. Babli alias Kahsmiro, the complainant-herein lodged a complaint against her husband Hansa, parents-in-law namely Budh Ram and Pani besides the present petitioner. It was sent by the learned Judicial Magistrate to the concerned police station under Section for investigation and registration of the case. Consequently the present FIR was registered. 4. The main allegations in the complaint are that at the time of marriage, many dowry articles were given; that twin babies were born out of this wed- lock; that after keeping the complainant well for sometime, all th accused started beating her on the pretext of bringing insufficient dowry and used to taunt her that she had come from an ingredient family; that a demand of Rs. 10,000/- was made by them, which even was brought by the complainant from her father and handed over to her husband in January, 2000; that after the birth of twin babies, another demand of Rs. 10,000/- was made, which was also met; that thereafter the demand of television, fridge and scooter was also put. A specific allegation has been levelled agaisnt the father-in-law of having illicit relations with another daughter-in-law Mohinder and that he made an attempt to develop illicit relations with the complainant also; that when she complained about this act to her husband, the latter did not pay any heed to it; that ultimately she left the matrimonial home on 15.8.2002 and when no solution came out, she filed the present complaint in the concerned Court. 5. In the reply filed on behalf of the State, the stand taken is that the challan has already been presented in the Court and as such the present proceedings should not be quashed. So far as the age of the present petitioner is concerned, it is admitted that she was a minor, but it is submitted that she has actively participated in the commission of the offence. 6. I have heard Mr. So far as the age of the present petitioner is concerned, it is admitted that she was a minor, but it is submitted that she has actively participated in the commission of the offence. 6. I have heard Mr. A.S. Brar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sanjeev Dahiya, AAG, Haryana and with their assistance I have perused the file. 7. Mr. Brar vehemently contends that the present petitioner has been involved in this case by knitting a wider net so that the entire family is entrapped; that general allegations have been levelled agaisnt her to project cruelty in order to attract Section 498-A Indian Penal Code; that so far as entrustment of dowry articles is concerned, all the dowry articles except gold and silver jewellery was allegedly entrusted to accused Nos. 1 and 2 i.e. the husband and father-in-law, whereas the gold jewellery is alleged to have been entrusted to the parents-in-law and there is no allegation of entrusting any dowry article to the present petitioner and thus Section 406 Indian Penal Code is also not attracted agaisnt her. So far as demand for more dowry is concerned Mr. Brar submits that the allegations against the present petitioner are vague and in general. Relying upon her Birth Certificate (Annexure P2), wherein her date of birth is recorded as May 10, 1986, Mr. Brar points out that at the time of marriage of the complainant, the petitioner was only 13 years old and at the time of lodging of the instant complaint, she was about 17 years of age. In support of his contentions, Mr. Brar relies upon the judgment of this Court in Lakhwinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 2000(4) RCR(Crl.) 104. 8. Opposing the contentions made on behalf of the petitioner, the learned State counsel submits that simply on the ground of being a minor, the petitioner cannot be absolved of the offence of harassing the complainant in the company of her brother and parents on account of dowry demand. He then contends that the challan has since been presented in the Court and the petitioner can resort to the other legal remedies available to her but cannot seek quashing of the proceedings at this stage. 9. After hearing the rival contentions of both the sides and scanning the record minutely, I am of the view that the present petition deserves to be allowed. 10. 9. After hearing the rival contentions of both the sides and scanning the record minutely, I am of the view that the present petition deserves to be allowed. 10. The allegations agaisnt the present petitioner are vague and general in nature. So far as entrustment of dowry articles is concerned, there is not even a single word agaisnt her. All the dowry articles were allegedly entrusted to other co-accused i.e. husband and parents-in-law of the complainant. With regard to harassment or cruelty also the allegations agaisnt the present petitioner are vague and uncertain. At two occasions, the demand of Rs. 10,000/- each is alleged to have been made. The first demand is alleged to have been made immediately after the marriage. The petitioner was born in the year 1986, as is evident from the Birth Certificate Annexure P2 (which is not disputed by the State) and as such, she was only 13 years old at that time. By no stretch of imagination can it be said that the petitioner had also joined hands with her co-accused in harassing the complainant on account of the alleged demand in so much so that she would go to the extent of giving beatings to the complainant. This does not appeal to judicial conscience at all. The allegation regarding the second demand of the similar amount after the birth of twin girls also apparently does not convince me so far as the present petitioner is concerned. 11. At the same time, the Court cannot lose sight of a material aspect, which has been explicity narrated as one of the main allegations i.e. grouse of the complainant against her father-in-law for having illicit relations with her other daughter-in-law and an attempt from his side to establish the like relations with the complainant as well and thereafter her complaining to the husband about the said attempt, but the latter did not lend an ear to it. Although I am showing restraint at this stage from commenting on merits of the case, yet cannot resist from observing that the aforesaid grouse appears to be the root cause in conjunction with other allegations as levelled in the complaint. 12. Although I am showing restraint at this stage from commenting on merits of the case, yet cannot resist from observing that the aforesaid grouse appears to be the root cause in conjunction with other allegations as levelled in the complaint. 12. There is no absolute bar to entertain a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure only on the ground that the challan has been presented or even the charges have been framed, because each case has to be illucidly examined on its own facts. The Honble Apex Court has lucidly examined the ambit and scope of the power of the High Court under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code read with Article 227 of the Constitution in the case of M/s Pepsi Foods Ltd. and another v. Special Judicial Magistrate and another, 1997(4) RCR(Crl.) 761 (SC) and in para 22 has observed thus : "It is settled that High Court can exercise its power of judicial review in criminal matters. In State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others, JT 1990(4) SC 650 : 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 this Court examined the extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution and also the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which it said could be exercised by the High Court either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. While laying down certain guidelines where the court will exercise jurisdiction under these provisions, it was also stated that these guidelines could not be inflexible or laying rigid formulae to be followed by the Court. Exercise of such power would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case but with the sole purpose to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. One of such guidelines is where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. Under Article 227 the power of superintendence by the High Court is not only of administrative nature but is also of judicial nature. Under Article 227 the power of superintendence by the High Court is not only of administrative nature but is also of judicial nature. This article confers vast powers on the High Court to prevent the abuse of the process of law by the inferior courts and to see that the stream of administration of justice remains clean and pure. The power conferred on the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and under Section 482 of the Code have no limits but more the power more due care and caution is to be exercised in using these powers. -" 13. In G. Sagar Suri v. State of U.P., 2000(1) RCR(Crl.) 707 (SC), their Lordships of the Apex Court while answering the same question and dealing with the scope of the powers of High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.c. or Article 227 of the Constitution vis-a-vis the agony of the accused during a criminal trial, referred to the decisions in M/s Pepso Foods Ltds case 9supra), as also in Ashok Chaturvedi and others v. Shitul H. Chanchani and another, 1998(3) RCR(Crl.) 801 (SC). 14. In Kans Raj v. State of Punjab and others, AIR 2000 Supreme Court 2324, their Lordships of the Apex Court have observed that a tendency has developed for roping in all the relations in dowry cases and if it is not discouraged, it is likely to affect case of the prosecution even againt the real culprits. The efforts for involving the other relations ultimately weaken the case of the prosecution even againt the real accused. 15. In a recent judgment of Delhi High Court rendered in Savitri Devi v. Ramesh Chand and others, 2003(3) Recent Criminal Reports (Criminal) 823, it was observed that there is growing tendency to come out with inflated and exaggerated allegations roping in each and every relation of the husband and if one of them happens to be of higher status or of vulnerable standing, he or she becomes an easy prey for better bargaining and blackmailing. A suggestion has been given to the law making authorities to have a review of the situation and the legal previsions. A suggestion has been given to the law making authorities to have a review of the situation and the legal previsions. In another judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in Nitha Ranjan Chakraborty v. Smt. Kalpana Chakraborty, 2003(1) RCR(Crl.) 481 (DB), the Honble Division Bench while dealing with a case under Section 498A Indian Penal Code observed that the things have now taken a reverse trend and the women are abusing beneficial provisions of Section 498-A. In para 7 of the judgment, it has been observed as under : "It is for the Law Commission and the Parliament either to continue that provision (Section 498-A Indian Penal Code) in the same form or to make the offence a non-cognizable one and a bailable one so that the ill-educated women of this country and their parents do not misuse the provision, to harass innocent people for the sin of contacting marriage with egoistic women. We have no hesitation to hold that if this situation is continued any longer the institution of marriage and the principle one man for woman will vanish into their air." With regard to the facts of the instant case agasint the present petitioner and following the ratio of the decision aforesaid, I am of the view that the continuation of the present proceedings against the present petitioner would be blatant abuse of the process of law and are liable to be quashed. The net spread is seemingly artificial in order to lend it a colour of cruelty. 16. Consequently, the present petition succeeds, FIR No. 209 dated 8.12.2002 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 498-A/4-6/506/34 Indian Penal Code registered at police station Jakhal;, Tehsil Tohana, District Fatehabad and the further proceedings qua the present petitioner Shinder Pal alias Kakke are hereby quashed. Appeal allowed.