JUDGMENT (ORAL)

S.S. Grewal, J. - This petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, relates to quashment of the impugned First Information Report registered under sections 498-N 406-506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, as well as the consequent proceedings taken there under including the framing of the charge against the petitioners under sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and under section 498A read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, whereas, the petitioners had already been discharged under sections 406 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, vide order of the Chief Judicial to Magistrate, Jind, dated 17.9.1991.

2. In brief facts of the case are that Smt. Kiran was married to Rakesh Kumar petitioner No. 1 on 4.6.1990. It was alleged that on 29.4. 1990 Rakesh Kumar along with his parents and sister Asha Rani came to Jind for performing the engagement ceremony. At that time they demanded Rs. 11,0001- and one guinea each for themselves other than Rakesh Kumar and Rs. 21,0001- and one guinea to Rakesh Kumar accused. Engagement ceremony was performed at Jind and an amount of Rs. 54,0001- and four rings of gold were given to the petitioners by the father of the complainant. Thereafter the accused-petitioners furnished list of articles to be given as dowry at the time of the performance of the marriage of Rakesh with Kiran. This demand with regard to articles was worth Rs. 2- ½ lacs. Another condition was also imposed that the marriage shall be performed at Ganga Nagar and not at Jind. It was also settled that the price of the article of dowry except gold would be paid to the accused. Rs. 54,000/- was paid in cash to the accused and Rs. 6,0001- was incurred as expenses for the engagement ceremony. Apart from that another amount of Rs. 40,0001- was paid to the accused at Jind and the father of the complainant agreed to pay Rs. 60,0001- subsequently. A bank draft of Rs. 60,0001- was sent to the petitioners to be drawn at Ganganagar, on 2.6.1990. The marriage was ultimately soleminised on 4.6.1990 at Ganganagar. Kiran stayed with Rakesh Kumar accused as his wife at Ganganagar up to 24.9.1990, on which date she was forcibly ousted from the house of the accused who refused to return the articles of dowry and mal-treated and coerced her for bringing more dowry from her parents. Father of Kiran could not satisfy the greed of the accused. The accused took Kiran with them. Subsequently she came and started residing with her parents at Jind.

3. The learned counsel for the parties were heard.

It is the admitted case of the parties that no sanction from the District Magistrate, Jind before initiating proceedings under sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act was obtained and as such no cognizance can be taken of the said offence against the petitioners at Jind.

4. The allegations against the accused that Kiran was subjected to cruelty by the accused i.e. her husband and his relations with a view to coerce her concerning demand of dowry allegedly took place at Ganga Nagar. As such the Court at Jind had no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence.

5. Even otherwise, the learned counsel for the parties stated at the bar that on 28.9.1993 a compromise was effected between Rakesh Kumar accused and his wife Kiran during the proceedings for dissolution of their marriage by divorce, and it was decided by the parties to get their disputes, including the present case resolved amicably.

6. For the foregoing reasons, the continuation of the proceedings on the basis of the impugned First Information Report before the trial Court including those on the basis of the charge already framed by the trial Court would amount to abuse of the process of the Court. The impugned First Information Report and the subsequent proceedings taken there under including the charge framed by the trial Court are hereby quashed. This petition is accordingly allowed.

Petition allowed.