Point of Law: - Expression ‘cruelty’ in Section 498A covers conduct which may drive women to commit suicide or cause grave injury (mental or physical) or danger to life or harassment with a view to coerce her to meet unlawful demand -

ORDER :

The instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the accused-petitioners for assailing the order dated 05.12.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge, Women Atrocities & Dowry Cases, Sri Ganganagar in Criminal Revision Petition No.35/2019 whereby, the revision petition preferred by the petitioners was rejected and the order dated 02.02.2019 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar in Criminal Regular Case No.214/2018 (State Vs. Arun Kumar & Ors.) directing the framing of charges against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 498A and 406 of the IPC was upheld.

In nutshell, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the Misc. Petition are noted hereinbelow:-

The respondent No.2 complainant Smt. Pratibha Dhingra filed a complaint against the petitioners and one Lakshit Kumar at the Police Station Mahila Thana, Sri Ganganagar on 21.12.2017 alleging inter alia that her marriage was solemnized with the petitioner No.1 Arun Kumar at the Classic Castle Resort, Firozpur (Punjab) on 17.02.2014 as per the Hindu rites and rituals. Wholesome dowry was given at the time of her marriage. All her dowry articles were taken into possession by the petitioners on reaching the matrimonial home. The complainant settled with the petitioner No.1 Arun Kumar at Firozpur, Punjab and on the very next day of the marriage, insinuations were made by her matrimonial relatives that the dowry articles given by her parents were not sufficient. She was insulted saying that only an I-20 Car had been given, whereas they were expecting a Fortuner car in dowry. The mother-in-law slapped the complainant when she spoke in defence of her parents. She was humiliated and harassed incessantly. A few days after the marriage, the complainant realized that her husband Arun Kumar was a drug addict. She got pregnant and the accused continued to harass her even during the period of her pregnancy. She gave birth to a baby girl on 01.07.2015 on which, her mother-in-law treated her with gross cruelty. In December 2016, the father-in-law outraged the modesty of the complainant and she was turned out of the matrimonial home. She came to know in the month of July 2017 that her husband was admitted at DMC Hospital, Ludhiana, on which, she went there to meet him, but she was disallowed by her mother-in-law to met the doctors, which made her suspicous. However, on 14.09.2017, the complainant could somehow gain access to the Doctor and came to know that her husband was suffering from Epileptic fits, which were caused by his drug addiction. The complainant’s father convened a community Panchayat meeting on 01.10.2017 and requested the petitioners to return her dowry articles, but they refused to do so. On the basis of this complaint, an FIR No.196/2017 came to be registered against the petitioners and one Lakshit Kumar at the Police Station Mahila Thana, District Sri Ganganagar and investigation was commenced. The Investigating Officer did not find the allegation for the offence punishable under Section 354 IPC substantiated and a chargesheet was filed against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 498A and 406 IPC. The trial court framed charges against the petitioners for these very offences by the order dated 02.02.2019, which was unsuccessfully challenged by filing a revision, which was dismissed vide order dated 05.12.2019. Both these orders are challenged in this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Learned counsel Shri Himmat Jagga and Ms. Aruna Negi representing the petitioners vehemently and fervently urged that the entire prosecution case is false and fabricated. The complainant deserted the petitioner No.1 Arun Kumar, who filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the Court of District Judge, Firozpur in the year 2017 and immediately on receiving the notices of that petition, the FIR came to be lodged. Attention of this Court was also drawn to the applications filed by Shri Pratesh Dhingra, bro