The summoning of an accused in a criminal case must reflect that the Magistrate has applied his mind to the facts and the law applicable thereto.

S.S.Nijjar, J.

1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of the complaint dated 17.5.1999 (Annexure P-2) and the summoning order dated 28.2.2000 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Malerkotla.

2. The case put forward in the petition is that the petitioner married the respondent on 3.12.1998. It was a simple marriage and few traditional gifts were given at the time of the marriage. After the marriage, petitioner and respondent lived as husband and wife at Barnala. It was found that respondent was a hot tempered lady. She used to pick quarrels with the petitioner on petty matters. Therefore, the relations between the petitioner and the respondent became strained. Petitioner made numerous efforts to persuade the respondent to live peacefully. However, in the month of February 1999, the respondent left the matrimonial home. On several occasions, the petitioner went to the house of the respondent for bringing her back to the matrimonial home. However, the respondent as well as her parents declined the offer. The petitioner filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights in the court of Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Barnala on 21.5.1999. During the pendency of this petition, a compromise was effected between the parties. The respondent agreed to part company with the petitioner. She took all the valuable articles, ornaments, scooter, fridge and house-hold articles, clothes and furniture etc. in the presence of the relatives and the respectable members of the society. The compromise was effected on 14.7.1999. On the same date all the articles had been returned. The agreement signed by the parties is attached with the petition as Annexure P-1. In this agreement, it is clearly stated that both the parties had agreed to get divorce. It is also stated that whatever Istridhan was given by the parents by the respondent has been received by her in the presence of the Panchayat. It is stated that she will henceforth have no relation with the petitioner and he is free to solemnise the marriage with anybody else, if he so pleases. It is reiterated that everything given by the parents of the wife has been received back. Furthermore, it is agreed that both the parties would be bound to withdraw all the cases filed against each other. It was further agreed that parties would not file any case regarding the maintenance in the court. The compromise is stated is have been made voluntarily without any undue pressure. It is signed by the husband and wife along with the witnesses. The witnesses include an Ex-Sarpanch, members of the Improvement Trust and other residents. In all 12 independent persons have witnesses the compromise. On the basis of the compromise, the petition under Section 9 has been withdrawn by the petitioner. Thereafter, respondent No. 2 filed the complaint under Sections 498-A/506 IPC on 17.5.1999. After examining the complainant and three other witnesses, the petitioner had been summoned to appear in court by order dated 28.2.2000.

3. After perusing the entire record, I am of the considered opinion that the proceedings instituted by the respondent are not bona fide. The compromise, Annexure P-1 categorically states that all the articles had been returned to the respondent. Even the petition for restitution for conjugal rights filed by the petitioner was withdrawn on the undertaking that parties will obtain divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act. The complaint does not contain any specific allegations with regard to entrustment of any particular article of dowry to any particular individual. The bald assertions made in the complaint would not be sufficient to constitute the offence under Sections 498-A/506 IPC. The Magistrate has summoned the petitioner by passing a wholly cryptic order. Although it is mentioned that the complainant has examined Karnail Singh, Lakh Singh and Gulzar Singh in suppo