Mr. Rameshwar Singh Malik, J.: (Oral) - These five identical petitions filed by the accused under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (‘Cr.P.C.’ for short), seeking quashing of the same impugned FIR No.3 dated 1.3.2014 registered under Sections 406, 498-A and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’ for short) at Police Station NRI, District Jalandhar (Rural), along with consequential criminal proceedings arising therefrom and also seeking setting aside the orders dated 15.9.2014, are being decided together vide this common order, as all the five petitions are based on same set of facts and between the same parties. However, for the facility of reference, facts are being culled out from CRM-M-14418-2014.

2. CRM-M-14418-2014 has been filed by Amandip Kaur (sisterin- law of the complainant) and Bakhshish Singh (maternal grand father- Nana of husband). CRM-M-4339-2015 has been filed by Rajdeep Kaur (another sister-in-law of the complainant). CRM-M-4498-2015 has been filed by Jaspreet Singh Mand (husband of the complainant). CRM-M-31176-2014 has been filed by Ranjit Kaur (mother-in-law of the complainant and CRM-M-22256-2014 has been filed by Kanwaljit Kaur Mann (another sister-in-law of the complainant).

3. It is also pertinent to note here that two sisters-in-law namely Kanwaljit Kaur Mann and Rajdeep Kaur as well as husband of the complainant, were declared proclaimed offenders as they had been living abroad. Since all the six petitioners are accused in the same FIR, they have approached this Court by way of these five petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of impugned FIR, orders dated 15.9.2014, whereby the above-said three petitioners were declared proclaimed offenders and also the consequential proceedings arising from the impugned FIR.

4. Briefly put, facts of the case, which are necessary for disposal of these petitions, are that marriage between Jaspreet Singh Mand and Manpreet Kaur took place on 14.2.2011 and soon thereafter they went to Canada. A male child was born out of this wedlock on 7.12.2011 in Canada. Some temperamental differences arose between the husband and wife and she filed a complaint before the Canadian Police on 5.1.2014 (Annexure P-2) with CRM-M-4498-2015, filed by husband namely Jaspreet Singh Mand. Thereafter, complainant came to India, concealed the fact about her above-said complaint pending consideration before the Canadian Police and got the impugned FIR registered on 1.3.2014 against all the six petitioners.

5. After getting the impugned FIR registered, complainant again went to Canada and did not return thereafter. Since the above-said three petitioners were declared as proclaimed offenders, investigating agency presented its police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the learned trial Court on 16.10.2014 against the remaining three accused. That is how, all the six accused are seeking quashing of the impugned FIR and consequential criminal proceedings arising therefrom.

6. Notice of motion was issued and thereafter vide order dated 18.11.2014 passed in CRM-34291-2014 in CRM-M-31176-2014, further proceedings before the learned trial Court were stayed by this Court. Identical replies have been filed by the respondent-State.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the impugned FIR as well as the criminal proceedings arising therefrom are nothing but a glaring abuse of process of court. The allegations levelled in the impugned FIR were absurd on the face of it as the same were based on a concocted story. The complainant has proceeded on a mala fide approach, while concealing the material facts from the notice of the investigating agency with a view to implicate all the family members of the husband including distant relatives and even the age was no bar. Petitioner Bakhshish Singh is the father of Ranjit Kaur, who is mother of Jaspreet Singh Mand (petitioner) and mother-in-law of the complainant, thus, he is maternal grandfather of husband of complainan