Mr. R.P. Nagrath, J.:- The complainant-petitioner impugns the order dated 24.7.2009 of Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Revision No. 60 of 2009, whereby summoning order of private respondents No. 2 to 6 dated 2.7.2008, issued by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sirsa, was set aside. The summoning order was passed on the protest petition dated 18.08.2003 filed by the petitioner to contest cancellation report presented by the prosecution.

2. Complaint dated 30.7.2002 was filed by petitioner in the Court of Area Magistrate who forwarded it to the police under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. and FIR No. 79 dated 6.8.2002 was registered under Sections 494/420/406/467/468/471 read with Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 13 accused were impleaded in the said complaint.

3. The facts of the case briefly are that the petitioner was married to Gokul Chand-accused No. 1 for about 15-16 years. A female child was born to her form the wedlock. She was harassed and maltreated for not meeting the demand of more dowry and used to be turned out of the matrimonial home. The petitioner used to be rehabilitated with the intervention of Panchayats. Accused No. 2 and 3, namely; Hukam Chand and Rajjo Bai are parents of Gokul Chand; accused Nos. 4 to 7 are relatives of the husband and the other accused 9 to 13 with whom we are presently concerned, are private respondents Nos. 2 to 6. Respondent No. 4, is Parkash Kaur with whom Gokul Chand aforesaid statedly solemnized second marriage; respondents No. 2 and 3 are her parents and respondents No. 5 and 6 are the sisters of respondent No. 4 and impleaded as accused having abetted the commission of crime.

4. The crucial allegation in the FIR was that all the accused including private respondents solemnized second marriage of Gokul Chand with private respondent No. 4-Parkash Kaur on 14.01.2001 at village Koppa, Tehsil Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh (UP) during subsistence of marriage with the petitioner. They got printed a false wedding card of second marriage describing Gokul Chand as Lekh Raj son of Gurditta Ram. In fact, Gurditta aforesaid is Mausa i.e. husband of mother’s sister of Gokul Chand. The above fact has also been certified by Vice-President of Gram Panchayat Sakeria, Tehsil Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, UP and by the President of the said Block.

5. Before filing of the complaint dated 30.07.2002, the petitioner had made a complaint to the Superintendent of Police. Panchayats of both the villages got effected a compromise dated 07.02.2001 whereunder Gokul Chand, accused No. 1 admitted that he has kept Parkash Kaur daughter of Boota Ram resident of village Koppa, District Udhampur (UP) as his concubine. Gokul Chand also agreed to deposit an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- in the bank account of the petitioner and provide her a separate residence. It was also agreed that all the dowry articles would be returned. Apart from that the petitioner was to be supplied 30 Maunds of wheat and 5 Maunds of rice every month. She was also to be given a milch buffalo. On the basis of said compromise the petitioner started residing at her matrimonial village Mangla.

6. Gokul Chand, however, did not comply with terms and conditions of the compromise. After a few days accused Nos. 1 to 4 persuaded the complainant to withdraw the amount deposited in her account with a promise to purchase 1½ acres of land in her name so that she keeps on getting lease money regularly. That amount was withdrawn by the petitioner and paid to accused Nos. 1 to 4, but they have been avoiding to abide by the said compromise and turned her out only in wearing apparels. These accused have thus misappropriated the said amount of petitioner and committed breach of trust with regard to dowry articles. It was further stated that a male child was also born from the wedlock of Gokul Chand with respondent No. 4-Parkash Kaur about six months before registration of FIR but that fact was kept concealed fro