JUDGMENT :

Jasgurpreet Singh Puri, J. (Oral) -

CRM-10147-2025

Prayer in this application is for placing on record the short reply filed on behalf of respondent No.2 alongwith Annexure R/2-1 to Annexure R/2-3.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. The short reply filed on behalf of respondent No.2 alongwith Annexure R/2-1 to Annexure R/2-3 is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

CRR-1903-2023

1. The present revision petition has been filed for setting aside the impugned judgment dated 04.07.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, vide which the order dated 03.02.2023 passed by the learned Sub-Division Judicial Magistrate, Jagraon, whereby respondent No.2-mother-in-law of the petitioner was summoned as an additional accused was set aside.

2. The learned Sub-Division Judicial Magistrate, Jagraon by way of the aforesaid order dated 03.02.2023 allowed an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. filed by the prosecution for summoning the mother-in-law, namely, Inderjit Kaur as an additional accused in a matrimonial dispute between the son of the aforesaid Inderjit Kaur and the petitioner. The aforesaid order dated 03.02.2023 was assailed by respondent No.2-mother-in-law by filing a revision petition, which was allowed by way of the aforesaid judgment dated 04.07.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana and now the aforesaid judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana has been assailed in the present revision petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is a case where the petitioner, who is a citizen of England got married to the son of respondent No.2 on 25.03.2008 in India in District Sangrur and thereafter, the petitioner-wife stayed in her in-laws house for a month and thereafter, she went back to England. He further submitted that at the time of marriage, some of the gold ornaments were entrusted with the family of the husband including mother-inlaw, who is respondent No.2 in the present case regarding which allegations were made in the FIR itself and thereafter, reiterated specifically while deposing before the learned trial Court at the time of trial. He further submitted that the police exonerated all the family members of the husband of the petitioner but had presented challan only against the husband, who was later on declared as a proclaimed offender and thereafter, he is now facing trial. He further submitted that the prosecution evidence is now complete and the trial is at fag end.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that after the statement of the petitioner-wife was recorded at the time of trial, the prosecution filed an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning the mother-in-law, who is respondent No.2 in the present case as an additional accused on the ground that dowry articles were entrusted with her, which she has not returned and consequent upon the same, the learned Sub-Division Judicial Magistrate, Jagraon vide order dated 03.02.2023 rightly summoned respondent No.2 as an additional accused on the basis of the aforesaid deposition made in the Court. He further submitted that when a revision petition was filed by respondent No.2, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana has erroneously set aside the order passed by the learned Sub-Division Judicial Magistrate, Jagraon without any justification and therefore, the judgment dated 04.07.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana may be set aside. While referring to the aforesaid order passed by the learned SubDivision Judicial Magistrate, Jagraon, he submitted that it was stated therein that the role of respondent No.2, who is the mother-in-law was specifically depicted not only in the FIR but also in the deposition made before the Court, wherein all the jewellery totalling to 30 tolas was entrusted and which has not been returned and the same is in the custody of respondent No.2-mother-in-law a