PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Jai Singh Sekhon, J.
Renu
Versus
State Of Haryana
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2985-M of 1988,
Decided On : FEBRUARY 12, 1990
CRIMINAL LAW - SECTION 498-A, 406 IPC - SECTION 498-A IPC IS PROSPECTIVE IN NATURE AND NOT RETROSPECTIVE - OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 406 IPC IS A CONTINUING OFFENCE.
Fact of the Case:
The accused-petitioners sought the quashing of an FIR registered against them for offenses under Sections 498-A, 109, and 406 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The allegations were that the petitioners had subjected the complainant's sister to cruelty and had not returned her stridhan (dowry).
Finding of the Court:
The court held that Section 498-A IPC, which deals with cruelty by husband or relatives of husband, is prospective in nature and not retrospective. Therefore, the petitioners could not be held liable for acts of cruelty committed prior to the insertion of Section 498-A in the IPC. However, the court held that the offense under Section 406 IPC, which deals with criminal breach of trust, is a continuing offense. Therefore, the petitioners could be held liable for the offense of not returning the complainant's sister's stridhan, as the offense was still continuing.
Issues: 1. Whether Section 498-A IPC is prospective or retrospective in nature? 2. Whether the offense under Section 406 IPC is a continuing offense?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that Section 498-A IPC is prospective in nature and not retrospective because the legislature intended it to be so. The court relied on the fact that the provision does not specifically state that it is retrospective. 2. The court held that the offense under Section 406 IPC is a continuing offense because the petitioners were in possession of the complainant's sister's stridhan and had refused to return it despite repeated requests.
Final Decision: The court quashed the FIR and investigation against the petitioners for offenses under Sections 498-A and 109 IPC. However, the court refused to quash the proceedings under Section 406 IPC against the petitioners.
1. The accused-petitioners have sought: the quashment of FIR No. 21 dt. 7-1-1988 for offences u/Ss.498-A, 109 and 406, Penal Code registered against them at Police Station City Panipat on the complaint of Harbhagwan Singh, brother of Smt. Raj Rani. According to the allegations in the first information report Smt. Raj Rani was married with Ashok Kumar accused-petitioner on 4-6-1979. Lekh Raj and Krishna Rani are the parents of aforesaid Ashok Kumar while Karam Chand and Kamlesh are his brothers and Renu is his sister. It is alleged that parents of Smt. Raj Rani had spent Rs.85,000.00 on her marriage but Smt. Raj Ranis in-laws being not satisfied with the dowry, started maltreating her and made her life miserable. It is further maintained that even after the marriage, the complainant gave Rs.8000/ -for the refrigerator and promised to give scooter whenever he will be able to manage money but the in-laws of Smt. Raj Rani kept on troubling her and ultimately she was turned out about six years prior to the filing of the complaint. The complaint was filed on 7-1-1988. Thereafter, Ashok Kumar petitioner filed a petition for divorce u/S. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act levelling false allegations to the effect that Raj Rani was incapable of giving birth to a child. This application was subsequently got dismissed in May 1988 as withdrawn after Dr. Prem Lata, Lady Doctor, opined that Raj Rani was capable of conception. A complaint on these allegations was filed before the Judicial Magistrate who referred the same to the police u/S.156 of the Criminal P.C. and on the same date a case u/Ss. 498-A, 109, and 406. IPC, was registered against the accused-petitioners. Subsequently, during investigation offence under S. 406, IPC has also been added. The chargesheet has already been put in before the trial Court.
2. The accused-petitioners have sought quashment of the FIR and investigation connected therewith on the ground that as per allegations in the complaint, offence under S. 498-A was allegedly committed prior to the year 1983 and that the provisions of S.498-A, IPC having been inserted vide Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Act No.46 of 1983 which came into force with effect from 25-12-1985, the petitioners are not liable for that offence. It is also maintained that the allegations of entrustment of alleged dowry being vague, no offence u/S. 406, IPC, is made out. The provisions of S. 468 of the Cr. P.C. are also stressed in order to hold that the cognizance of these offences cannot be taken being barred by time as both these offences are punishable with imprisonment for three years and were committed about six years prior to the filing of the complaint.
3. Mr. J. B. Tacoria, the learned counsel appearing for the State assisted by Mr. Gopi Chand Bhalla, the learned counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, maintained that the offence u/S. 406, IPC being continuous one, there is no question of the cognizance of the same being barred by time. It is also maintained that the allegations of the husband in the divorce petition regarding Raj Rani being incapable of conceiving would also amount to cruelty within the meaning of S. 498-A, IPC, and thus limitation will start from the said date. It is further stressed that the husband and the parents-in-laws of Raj Rani were entrusted with the Stridhan of Raj Rani and they having not returned the same to her so far, are ex facie liable for offence u/S.406, I.P.C.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties besides perusing the record. Admittedly, according to the first information report lodged on 7-11-1988 at the instance of Harbhagwan Singh complainant, brother of Smt. Raj Rani, the accused-petitioners had turned her out six years earlier, which, in turn, implies that the last act of cruelty towards Raj Rani took place somewhere in the year 1982 whereas the provisions of S.498-A, IPC were inserted in the Penal Code vide Act No.46 of 1983 and came into force with effect from 25- 12-
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.