The High Court cannot quash an FIR unless the allegations do not constitute an offence; the judiciary must respect the trial process and not supplant it with its judgment on the merits of the case.

Judgment :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking quashing of FIR No. 23 of 2023, dated 07.06.2023, registered at the Women Police Station, Una, District Una, H.P., for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the informant, Isha Chauhan, filed a complaint with the police, asserting that she was married to the accused Akhil Chauhan in 2018, according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. Her husband began demanding money six months after their marriage. She started a job in Chandigarh on 10.01.2020, and shifted to Chandigarh with her husband. She became pregnant in June 2020 but suffered a miscarriage due to harassment and abuse. Her stridhan, including jewellery, a fixed deposit of Rs. 2.00 lacs, and dowry articles, were retained by the accused. She was forced to pay Rs. 10 lakh and the registration charges for a car. She purchased a TVS Jupiter for herself with her own money, but was compelled to give it to her sister-in-law. The accused increasingly demanded money and land and subjected her to physical and mental torture. The informant filed a complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act at Una. She also submitted an application to the Women's Cell, Una, but the accused refused to appear before the Women’s Cell. Accordingly, it was prayed that action be taken against the accused.

3. The police registered the FIR and investigated the matter. The police made enquiries in the neighbourhood, but no house except the house of the uncle was located in the neighbourhood. The police seized the documents from the Gram Panchayat, recorded the statements of the witnesses as per their version and filed the charge sheet before the Court after the completion of the investigation.

4. Being aggrieved by the filing of the charge-sheet, the petitioner Manjeet Kaur has filed the present petition for quashing of the FIR and the proceedings pending before the learned Trial Court. It has been asserted that the marriage of the informant and the petitioner’s son was solemnised on 22.09.2018. The relationship between the petitioner’s son and the informant remained cordial till 2020. The petitioner’s husband is an employee of National Fertilisers Limited, Naya Nangal, District Ropar, Punjab. He was posted at National Fertilisers Limited, Panipat. The informant joined the company of the entire family at Panipat after her marriage and resided at Panipat till March, 2019. The informant got the employment and joined as a Data Entry Operator at Net Smartz Infotech, Chandigarh. She shifted to Chandigarh to live with her mother and younger brother with the consent of the entire family of the petitioner. The informant never had any association with the petitioner for more than 3 to 4 days at a time because the informant used to reside at Chandigarh, and the petitioner used to reside with her husband. The petitioner had gone on a family trip to Amritsar with the informant on 12.06.2022 and had shared a very good and affectionate bonding with her. This fact is evident from the photographs taken during the trip. The petitioner’s son got employed with M&M Swaraj Tractors at Mohali in January 2020 and started residing with the informant at Chandigarh. He and the informant shifted to Nangal thereafter. One daughter was born to the informant and her husband on 17.08.2021. The petitioner used to visit the informant’s house