Specific allegations of cruelty and stridhan retention against mother-in-law in 498A FIR, taken at face value, disclose prima facie offences precluding quashing under CrPC 482; no mini-trial permissible at this stage.

JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, Judge

The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of FIR No. 31 of 2023, dated 5.8.2023, registered at Women Police Station Baddi, District Solan, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 406 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the consequential proceedings arising out of the said FIR.

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the informant, Pooja Devi, made a complaint to the police asserting that she was married to Ram Kumar on 20.11.2021. Her father gave a gold ring, clothes, and Rs. 21,000/- to her husband during the engagement ceremony. He also gave Rs. 2100/- each to her husband’s relatives. He told her husband and his relatives that he was the only earning member in the family and that he would solemnise the marriage according to his means. Her husband's relative made various demands at the time of the marriage, and the informant’s father tried his best to meet those demands. One gold ring, gifts, blankets, ornaments, and household articles were provided at the time of the marriage. Her ornaments were taken by her mother-in-law, who said that she would keep them in a safe place. Her husband started abusing and beating her by saying that his marriage was not solemnised with his consent. He was a drug addict and would shake uncontrollably. Whenever the informant inquired about her husband’s condition, she was beaten. Once he beat her, and she fell. She made a complaint to her mother-in-law, uncle-in-law and aunt-in-law, and brother-in-law, who assured her that such an act would not be repeated. The behaviour of her husband’s relatives changed after this incident. They started picking up a quarrel with the informant on trivial matters. Her mother-in-law said that she was unfortunate to marry her son to the informant. Many proposals of marriage were received who were ready to provide a sufficient dowry; however, the informant had not brought anything with her. Her uncle-in-law, Tarsem, and his son, Laxman, started harassing her. Tarsem stated that a Brezza Car was provided in the dowry of his son; however, she had not brought even a motorcycle. She was told to bring a vehicle. She told Tarsem that her father was unable to provide a vehicle. Tarsem and his son started shouting at the informant and told her that she would have to upgrade her status in case she wanted to reside in her matrimonial home. Son of Tarsem started acting indecently with her. When the informant protested, he told her to develop a relationship with him, and nobody would say anything to her. She told this incident to her husband, who told the informant to act as advised by his uncle and cousin because they were maintaining the family accounts. Laxman threatened to kill the informant. Her mother-in-law and other persons started quarrelling with the informant and harassed her for bringing an insufficient dowry. Her mother-in-law asked her to do all the household chores. The informant became pregnant and told this fact to her mother-in-law. Her aunt-in-law and uncle-in-law administered some medicine to her. Her condition deteriorated, and when she refused to take the medicine, her uncle-in-law told her that her husband was a drunkard and that he would not be able to take care of her and her child. Sh