The provisions of Section 482, Cr.P.C., can be invoked in matrimonial disputes in certain circumstances, such as when the allegations in the FIR do not constitute any offence or when the allegations are absurd and inherently improbable. However, the High Court should exercise its powers under Section 482, Cr.P.C., sparingly and only in the rarest of rare cases.

R.L.Anand, J.

1. Two important questions of law are likely to be decided and discussed by me in the present judgment:

(i) What are the suitable premises on which the provisions of Section 482, Cr. P.C., should be invoked in the matrimonial disputes ? and

(ii) Which Court has the territorial jurisdiction to try the offences allegedly committed under Sections 406 and 498-A read with Section 120-B, Indian Penal Code ?

2. Mandeep Singh son of Surjit Singh, resident of Mohalla Ram Nagar, Mandi (Himachal Pradesh), is the petitioner in the present petition filed under Section 482, Cr. P.C., for the quashment of FIR No. 43 dated 6.5.1996, Police Station B Division, Amritsar, under Sections 406, 498-A and 120-B, Indian Penal Code, and the petition has been filed against the State of Punjab and Smt. Mandeep Kaur daughter of Harbans Singh, resident of Jaspal Nagar, Sultanwind Road, Amritsar, who is the wife of Sukhdev Singh, brother of Mandeep Singh-petitioner.

3. It has been averred in the petition by Mandeep Singh that marriage between his brother Sukhdev Singh and Smt. Mandeep Kaur, respondent No. 2, was solemnised at Amritsar on 6.2.1994. This marriage was consummated between the husband and the wife and out of this wedlock a female child was born to respondent No. 2 on 29.4.1995. In the month of December, 1995, respondent No. 2 left for Amritsar and thereafter she did not join the company of her husband at Mandi. It is alleged that at the instance of respondent No. 2 FIR No. 43 under Sections 406, 498-A and 120-B, IPC, was registered in Police Station B Division, Amritsar. The petitioner was also granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Judge, Amritsar, on 1st June, 1996. Quashment of the FIR has been sought by the petitioner - Mandeep Singh on the averments that it does not spell out any criminality. On the other hand, the allegations made in the FIR, lodged at the instance of respondent No. 2 are wild and vague. Further the petitioner hails from Himachal Pradesh and as such the offence under Section 498-A, IPC, cannot be tried by the Criminal Courts at Amritsar. It is further averred by the petitioner that he has nothing to gain with the alleged demand of dowry and the cruelty of his brother Sukhdev Singh. By placing reliance on several authorities in the petition itself, finally the petitioner Mandeep Singh has prayed for the quashment of the FIR and all the subsequent proceedings.

4. Before I incorporate the stand of respondent No. 2 in the present judgment, first of all I would like to incorporate the material averments of the application dated 15.4.1996 on the basis of which FIR No. 43 was registered in the Police Station. Smt. Mandeep Kaur, respondent No. 2, addressed one application to I.G. (Border Range), Amritsar, and in the said application she has prayed for the registration of the case against Sukhdev Singh, Surjit Singh, Smt. Narinder Kaur, Mandeep Singh (present petitioner), Smt. Bela wife of Inderjit Singh. It may be mentioned here that in para No. 9 of the petition it has been averred by the petitioner himself that his sister had already been discharged from the allegations.

5. To continue with the material averments of the application, Smt. Mandeep Kaur has alleged at the first instance about her marriage with Sukhdev Singh on 6.2.1994, which was solemnised at Lawrence Road, Amritsar. She has stated in her application that after performing the Anand Karaj, her parents and brothers gave Istri Dhan to her husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law as per list attached with the application. Apart from the above articles, her parents gave to the aforesaid accused suit, ring made of gold and other items at the time of the Milni and at the time of the leaving of the Barat. Funiture, which was not given at the time of the marriage, was sent by her parents from Amritsar on the persistent demand of her husband and her father-in-law and mother- in-law by getting it manufactured from Amritsar in the month of July, 1996