The judgment established that specific overt acts are required to prove the involvement of relatives in dowry harassment cases, and the pendency of a civil proceeding cannot bring an end to a criminal proceeding arising from the same set of facts.

G. S. Ahluwalia, J.

1. With the consent of the parties, case is heard finally.

2. This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the F.I.R. in crime No. 205/2014 registered by Mahila Police Station, Padav, Distt. Gwalior for offences punishable under Sections 498A,506 of I.P.C. and under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. The facts necessary for the disposal of this application in short are that the complainant/ respondent no.2, lodged a written complaint on 8-12-2014 against the applicants alleging inter-alia that She was married to the applicant no.1 as per Hindu Rites and Rituals on 26-2-2014. At the time of marriage, apart from valuable household articles, an amount of Rs. 8,00,000 was given by her father in cash. When She went to her matrimonial house after marriage, all the applicants started passing taunts that less cash has been given in the marriage. All used to say that the complainant has three elder brothers and all of them are earning and since, they have spent lot of money on marriage therefore, the complainant should bring 10,00,000 from her parents. All the applicants used to laugh at the complainant. The husband used to say that she is not beautiful. The applicant no. 5 (Sister of father-in-law) was saying that they would get the applicant no. 1 remarried. The applicants were getting the entire household work done from the complainant and they also used to say that she is short heighted. All the applicants started harassing her physically and mentally and used to say that She cannot see during the night. On 8-4-2014, her father-in-law informed her father that they should take her back as she is not well. When her father and brother tried to convince her in-laws, then all the applicants started making demand of Rs. 10 lacs. On 8-4-2014, She was sent along with her father and brother without allowing her to take extra cloths and from thereafter they have not come to take her back. Thus, it was mentioned that the complainant does not want to reconcilicate with her in-laws any more. The police accordingly registered the offence under Sections 498-A,506 of I.P.C. and under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

4. It is submitted by the Counsel for the applicants that they have been falsely implicated. The applicant no. 4 who is the younger brother-in-law of the respondent no. 2/complainant and is working in Delhi and is residing separately. It was further submitted that several applications were given by the applicant no.1 against false implication however, no proper investigation has been done. It was further submitted that the F.I.R. has been lodged by way of counter blast as the applicant no.1 has filed a suit for divorce.

5. Per Contra, the Counsel for the respondents submitted that the complainant/respondent no. 2 was harassed and treated with cruelty due to non-fulfilment of their demand of dowry. It is further submitted that the complainant/respondent no. 2 had filed an application before the Parivar Paramarsh Kendra where the applicant no. 1 had appeared along with the applicant no. 3 and 4. The complainant/respondent no. 2 was ready and willing to go with the applicant no.1, but in fact the applicant no. 1 is not interested in keeping her with him. It is further submitted that in the Parivar Paramarsh Kendra, the applicants no. 1,2,3 and 4 had appeared whereas only the applicant no.1 was summoned, which clearly show that the applicant no. 4 is also actively interfering with the family affairs of the applicant no. 1 and the complainant/respondent no.2.

6. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

7. It is submitted by the Counsel for the applicants that so far as the applicant no. 5 is concerned, She has been arrayed as an accused merely because She is the sister of father-in-law (cqvk) of the applicant no.1. Although She is also the resident of Gwalior but She is residing separately from the family of the applicants no.1. The applicant no. 5 has her own separate family and