Nov 23, 2010
Chandigarh, November 23
The increasing trend of roping in more and more relatives in dowry demand cases has not escaped the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s notice. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur minced no words while saying that complainants more often than not were levelling inflated and exaggerated allegations in such matters.
Justice Nirmaljit Kaur asserted: Lately, a tendency has developed to rope in all the relations in dowry cases in order to browbeat and pressurise the immediate family of the husband. Accordingly, sometimes inflated and exaggerated allegations are made.
The assertion came after a bunch of petitions for quashing the impugned First Information Report dated October 9, 2008, for subjecting a married woman to cruelty and another offence under Sections 406/498-A of the IPC registered at a City police station, Rajpura, Patiala district. Directions were also sought for quashing “all other subsequent proceedings”.
The petition against the state of Punjab was filed by Balak Ram, 69, and his wife Kamla Devi, following a complaint by daughter-in-law Anita Rani. Her marriage with Naresh Kumar was solemnised way back in 1992
Seeking the quashing of the FIR, counsel for the petitioners submitted they had got nothing to do with the matrimonial life of the complainant for the last about 17 years and the FIR was an abuse of the process of law.
It was further stated the complainant left for Rajpura to visit her parental house on November 10, 2007; and did not bother to call and enquire about the two children residing with their father.
Taking up the matter, Justice Nirmaljit Kaur asserted: “In the present case, the FIR was lodged after 17 years of the marriage. There is no allegation qua the demand of dowry. The allegations against the father-in-law and mother-in-law are vague and not specific. However, the allegation of beating is only qua the husband with the specific allegation of use of violence by him against her”.
In her detailed order, Justice Nirmaljit Kaur added: “The present petition qua the petitioners, that is the mother-in-law and father-in-law of the complainant is allowed and FIR number 239 dated October 9, 2008, under Sections 406/498-A of IPC registered at Police Station City Rajpura, Patiala district and all other subsequent proceedings arising out thereto are, hereby, quashed, whereas, plea filed by the husband of the complainant is dismissed as being devoid of merit.
Source: TheTribune
No comments:
Post a Comment