JUDGMENT

Saran, J. -- 1. Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. Brief facts of this case, relevant for the purpose of the present appeals, are that the complainant (Shilpika Kalra) and her husband (Manish Kalra) got married on 28.7.2007. The marriage took place in Delhi, but thereafter, they were living together in Mumbai, where both were working. Admittedly, the two of them started living separately since 10.6.2009. Thereafter, on 24.7.2009, the husband-Manish Kalra filed a divorce petition before the Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai. The said divorce petition is still pending.

4. Then, after a gap of nearly three and a half years, on 28.1.2013, the wife-Shilpika Kalra filed a complaint in Delhi seeking registration of First Information Report (for short ‘FIR’) against Manish Kalra (husband), Kamlesh Kalra (mother-in-law), Avnish Kalra (brother-in-law) and Suman Kalra (sister-in-law), along with a list of stridhan articles, alleging that the said articles were in possession of all the accused. Then, on 29.10.2014, the police registered an FIR under sections 406 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) against all the accused as mentioned above. The said FIR reads as follows :

“I Shilpika Kalra, on my complaint appeared in CAW Cell on 15.9.2014 at 11:30 am. My in-laws have not appeared in spite of being informed. I was married to Manish Kalra under Hindu rites was arranged & on 28.7.2007 in Delhi Cantt. On the wedding my family & widow mother of Late Brig S. H. Grover gave cash & gifts as per their standard & standard of my-in-laws. After marriage I resided in J-1902 CR Park where my mother-in-law demanded my salary & mentioned. She received all white goods for her marriage from her brother when she got married. My mother should set up my house. They also insulted me that their elder son was married Taj Hotels & my mother did not do the needful. All expensive Omega watches, designer gifts & cash gifted were not appreciated. After the marriage I took a transfer from DNA Newspaper Delhi & relocated to Mumbai to join my husband. He deserted me on June 10, 2009 & filed a frivolous petition for divorce. My stridhan is with my mother-in-law Kamlesh Kalra, Avnish Kalra, Suman Kalra. My mother-in-law resides & is in the possession of my stridhan. Mrs. Kamlesh Kalra (all responsible to influence my husband). Kindly also ask Mrs. Kamlesh Kalra to return my stridhan. She is instrumental in influencing my husband to file a divorce petition. Next date 19.0.2014 at 11:00 am. Sd/Shilpika Kalra, J-1902, C.R. Park, New Delhi. 9920389955.”

5. Then, on 16.6.2015, husband-Manish Kalra deposited the stridhan articles, along with a pay order of Rs. 5,98,000/-, with the Investigation Officer, because the complainant/wife-Shilpika Kalra refused to accept the same on the ground that the list submitted was incomplete, and that all the stridhan articles were not deposited.

6. On 25.5.2016, a charge-sheet was filed by the police against the husband-Manish Kalra and mother-in-law Kamlesh Kalra, and not against the brother-in-law and sister-in-law (Avnish Kalra and Suman Kalra, respectively), who were residents of Singapore from 2008-2014 and thereafter of Hong Kong since 2014. In the said charge-sheet, it was clearly mentioned that “complainant has not provided the list of remaining stridhan till now.”

Then, on 9.1.2017, it was recorded by the police that the complainant/wife-Shilpika Kalra visited the police station on 24.8.2016 and submitted a letter, with the additional list of her stridhan articles which were not returned to her. The same list of stridhan articles was again filed with the police on 5.12.2016, with a request to recover the remaining articles. This additional list was given after more than seven years of the divorce petition having been filed, and more than a year after the husband-Manish Kalra had deposited the stridhan articles along with a pay order of Rs. 5,98,000/-, with the Investigation Officer.

7. Then, on 22.2.201