JUDGMENT :

Harpreet Singh Brar, J. (Oral)

1. This order of mine shall decide all the abovementioned cases as they arise out of the similar factual matrix and pray for the same relief.

However, for the sake of brevity, the facts have been taken from CRM-M-58916 -2023 (O&M) for adjudication of the cases mentioned above.

2. The petitioners have approached this Court by way of filing the present petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter Cr.P.C., for brevity) for quashing of the impugned FIR bearing no.36 dated 03.08.2023 under Section 420, 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter IPC) registered at Police Station Dharamgarh, District Sangrur (Annexure P-1), and the Final Report under section 173 Cr.P.C. (Annexure P5) as well as all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

3. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the marriage was solemnized between Kamalpreet Singh, son of the respondent no. 2 and Amanpreet Kaur on 29.12.2019 and subsequently, the couple stayed at their matrimonial house situated in village Satoj, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur. Thereafter, Amanpreet Kaur went to Canada upon receiving her student visa on 23.08.2020. Subsequently, Amanpreet Kaur sent sponsorship to her husband Kamalpreet Singh in pursuance of which the necessary documents were submitted by the latter before the Canadian High Commission along with the statement of purpose of visiting (Annexure P-3). Accordingly, Kamalpreet Singh went to Canada on 04.04.2022 upon receiving his work visa. However, later on, the relations between the couple soured and it has been alleged that petitioner(s) had no intention to fulfil their obligations from the very beginning and thus, cheated the complainant by extracting money from him under false pretext. Further, the allegations against the petitioner(s) are that they deceived the respondent no. 2 and his son since the petitioners are now demanding ransom in order to extend his work permit.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner(s) inter alia contends that Amanpreet Kaur was in constant touch with Kamalpreet Singh and her in-laws and there was no intention to deceive on her part which is manifestly clear from the fact that a sponsorship was sent by her for Kamalpreet Singh to come and stay with her and in pursuance of which he went to Canada on work visa (supra). On being harassed by the respondent no. 2 and police personnel and raising a demand of Rs. 35,00,000/- a CRWP-7441-2023 titled as Hardev Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others (Annexure P-4) was filed for protection of life and liberty wherein notice of motion was issued by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 28.07.2023. Thereafter, the FIR (supra) was registered on 03.08.2023 as a counter blast to CRWP (supra). Further it is argued that a perusal of the police report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. (Annexure P-5), shows that prima facie no offence under Sections 420, 120-B IPC is made out against the petitioners as it is clearly visible that Kamalpreet Singh went to Canada on work visa which was procured with the help of Amanpreet Kaur. Therefore, Amanpreet Kaur along with other accused duly fulfilled the promises made to respondent no. 2 at the time of marriage. A mere demand of money by Amanpreet Kaur from her husband Kamalpreet Singh does not constitute an offence under Section 420 IPC as it falls under the matrimonial obligations of the husband to take care of his wife and also to bear her expenses. Moreover, necessary ingredients required to constitute an offence under section 420 IPC are absent. It is further submitted that it was the constant harassment meted out to Amanpreet Kaur by her husband Kamalpreet Singh on account of bringing more dowry which lead to the matrimonial discord and the present FIR has been lodged by them only to save themselves from criminal prosecution.

5. Per contra the learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 contends that the entire expenditure of Amanpreet Kaur including her visa a