IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 04.09.2025 Pronounced on: 10.09.2025 DHEERAJ AND OTHERS …Petitioners V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. R.K. Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Kshitij Bharti, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.

None for respondent No. 2.

SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL, J. (ORAL)

This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No.

617 dated 11.07.2017 under Sections 323, 498-A, 406, 506, 376, 120-B and 34 Indian Penal Code, Police Station Model Town Panipat and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, qua the petitioners.

The facts, as narrated by respondent No. 2 in the first report to the police are that complainant was married with accused-Manish on 11.03.2016 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. At the time of marriage, her parents paid Rs. 7,00,000/-, beyond their capacity and sufficient household articles were given in dowry. Soon after the marriage, the in-laws started harassing her for dowry. Her father-in-law, mother-in-law demanded gold jewellery, cash etc. and when she expressed inability, she was beaten up. The mother-in-law kept her jewellery and did not permit her to use the same. Complainant further alleged that due to non fulfillment of demands, her husband did not have sexual relations with her. Her brother-in-law, Rajesh, made obscene gestures and one day when she was alone, he tried to commit rape upon her, which attempt she resisted. When she narrated the incident to her husband and in-laws, she was threatened and asked to keep quite. Her in-laws thrashed and expelled her from the matrimonial home. On the asking of her parents, she returned. She moved an application before Women Police Station, Panipat, in September 2016, whereafter, her husband and in-laws assured that they would not harass her for dowry. She was taken to the matrimonial house in September 2016. Complainant further alleged that on 08.11.2016, when her husband and in-laws were away, her brother-in-law, finding her alone, committed rape against her wishes and threatened to kill her, in case she disclosed the incident. When, she complained to her husband and in-laws, she was asked to remain mum and threatened with dire consequences, in case she dared to disclose the incident. On 11.11.2016, her husband took her to Jakoli, where she started living with him. He tried to make relations with her, but could not succeed. Complainant further alleged that her husband and his family members concealed the fact that her husband was impotent and a fraud was practiced on her. In this regard, a Panchayat was convened, in which, her husband admitted that he was impotent and agreed to get himself treated. Her family members got him treated in a clinic in Panipat, but he could not be cured. On 18.02.2017, her husband and in-laws demanded dowry, gave her severe beatings and turned her out of the matrimonial home, with threat of death, in case she returned empty handed. Her stree dhan was retained by the in-laws.

Status report by way of an affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police, CAW Panipat had been filed by respondent No. 1. In the status report, State of Haryana, submitted that statement of complainant/respondent No. 2 was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. It was stated that petitioner No. 2, petitioner No. 3 were joined in investigation, interrogated and their disclosure statements were recorded that on mutual discussion they had decided to send Rajesh to complainant in place of Vinod, who was not capable of performing sexual intercourse, as they wanted the lineage of the family to continue. It was stated that on conclusion of investigation, the police submitted final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. against accused Rajesh, Vinod Kumar, Dheeraj, Vidya Devi and Mohan Lal for trial in respect of offences punishable under Sections 323, 376, 406, 498-A, 506, 120-B and 34 IPC.

Respondent No. 2 initially put in appearance thr