Back
2009(7) Supreme 318
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V.S.Sirpurkar and Deepak Verma, JJ.
Neelu Chopra & Anr. — Appellants
versus
Bharti — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 949 of 2003
Decided on : 07-10-2009
Facts of the Case :
Present Appeal has been filed against judgment of High Court whereby petition for quashing criminal proceedings against appellants pending before the trial court had been dismissed . Complaint had been filed under Sections 406,498A read with 114 IPC against appellants by their daughter in law.
Findings of the Court :
In order to lodge a proper compliant, mere mention of the sections and the language of those sections is not be all and end of the matter . What is required to be brought to the notice of the court is the particulars of the offence committed by each and every accused and the role played by each and every accused in committing of that offence. Perusal of complaint showed that it was sadly vague. It did not show as to which accused had committed what offence and what was the exact role played by appellants in the commission of offence. There could be said something against husband of respondent as the allegations were made against him more precisely but he had already expired . Under such circumstances, it would be an abuse of process of law to allow the prosecution to continue against the aged appellants on the basis of vague and general complaint which was silent about the precise acts of the appellants. High Court merely mentioned that the allegation in the complaint was of retaining jewellery articles in possession of the husband and the petitioners. Now if the articles were in the possession of the husband, there was no question of the appellants being in possession of the jewellery .Insofar as the offence under Section 498A IPC was concerned, no material or allegation worth the name found against appellants . All the allegations appeared to be against the deceased husband. Impugned judgment of High Court was set aside - Complaint was quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C .
JUDGMENT
V.S. Sirpurkar, J.—
1. This appeal is against the judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court whereby the petition for quashing the criminal proceedings against the appellants pending before the trial court has been dismissed.
2. The factual scenario is that the appellant Neelu Chopra and Krishan Sarup Chopra are husband and wife and the respondent Bharti is their daughter-in-law. Bharti was married in the year 1984 to one Rajesh, the son of present appellants. However, as per the version of the respondent the married life was not smooth on account of unreasonable demand of dowry and the misbehaviour on the part of husband Rajesh and his parents, the appellants herein. Ultimately, on 24.12.1993 a complaint came to be filed before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gidderbaha. The complaint was accepted in the sense that the learned Judicial Magistrate by his order dated 25.1.1994 took the cognizance of the offences under Sections 406, 498A read with 114 IPC. This order of cognizance was challenged by the accused persons. Rajesh is reported to have expired on 6.1.2006. The High Court, however, did not agree to quash the complaint and took a view that the complaint did show the material sufficient to proceed against the appellants. The High court, however, expressed that it would be open to the Magistrate to exempt the personal presence of the appellants. 3.
3. Mr. M.N.Krishnamani, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants painstakingly took us though the original complaint as also the allied facts relevant for the determination of the present controversy. It was pointed out by the learned senior counsel that the marriage had taken place way back in the year 1984 while the complaint was filed on 24.12.1993 i.e. after about nine years of the marriage. It was further pointed out that two daughters were born to the complainant and presently the complainant along with his daughter is residing in the same house but on the different floor. Learned senior counsel points out that those daughters are now 22 and 19 years of age. He further points out that presently the age of the first appellant is 76 years while her husband is of 80 years. Learned senior counsel, however, besides these facts, laid great stress on the fact that the complaint is absolutely vague and silent as regards the allegation against the present appellants.
4. We have seen the complaint very carefully. From a bare reading of the complaint it is apparent that the problem started barely after six months of the marriage. In paragraph 3 of the complaint, it is stated that all the accused came to complainant’s parents house at Gidderbaha and asked her parents to give the complainant more gold and other articles as dowry otherwise they would leave the complainant there and Rajesh would be married second time. In paragraph 4, the complaint is against Rajesh in the sense that the accused Rajesh asked the complainant to hand over the ornaments and clothes to his parents lest they are lost in the way. On reaching to Delhi when the ornament were asked back by the complainant, they were not returned back. When we see the complaint as a whole it is basically against the accused Rajesh. All the allegations are against Rajesh. There is undoubtedly some reference to the present appellants, but what strikes us is that there are no particulars given as to date on which the ornaments were handed over, as to the exact number of ornaments or their description and as to the date when the ornaments were asked back and were refused. Even the weight of the ornaments is not mentioned in the complaint and it is a general and vague complaint that the ornaments were sometime given in the custody of the appellants and they were not returned. What strikes us more is that even in paragraph 10 of the complaint where the complainant says that she asked for her clothes and ornaments which were given to the accused and they refused to give these back, the date is significantly absen
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
