Criminal Revision No.764 of 2009.
-1-
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
Criminal Revision No.764 of 2009.
Date of decision:25.3.2009.
Sunil
...Petitioner.
Versus
State of Haryana.
...Respondent.
...
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. C. Puri.
...
Present: Mr.Shalender Mohan Advocate for the petitioner.
...
K. C. Puri, J.
Judgment.
This is a Revision Petition under Section 401 Cr.P.C for
setting aside the impugned order dated 19.1.2009, Annexure P-4,
passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-II, Bhiwani vide which
application under Section 319 Cr.P.C filed by the petitioner for
summoning Dinesh, Sanjay, Ajay and Vijay @ Viju sons of Ishwar
Chander, residents of Purani Anaj Mandi, Rohtak was dismissed.
Criminal Revision No.764 of 2009.
-2-
The law was set into motion on the recording of
statement of Sanjay son of Prem Parkash, resident of Modan Gali,
Bhiwani who has stated that he has one brother and three sisters.
His elder sister Anita was married at Nanital and younger to her,
Rekha @ Reshmi was married to Ashok Kumar son of Ishar Chand
Mahajan, resident of Purani Anaj Mandi, Rohtak on 24.4.2007
according to Hindu rights and ceremonies by his parents who gave
dowry articles as per their capacity. His brother-in-law Ashok
Kumr was running a shop of confectionary at Chandigarh at the
time of marriage. After 2 or 3 months of the marriage, Ashok
Kumar came to Rohtak after leaving the shop. Rekha lived
amicably in her matrimonial home for 2 or 3 months after the
marriage. After leaving the shop by Ashok Kumar, he, his brother-
in-laws Dinesh, Sanjay, Ajay, Vijay, her father-in-law and mother-
in-law started harassing her on petty matters. The mother-in-law of
Rekha daily asked Rekha that she had come from poor and hungry
family and that her parents gave nothing in dowry. These incidents
were told by Rekha to her parents and brother whenever she came
to their house. Rekha told him on telephone that the above-said
persons were harassing her badly and when he tried to ask Rekha
about the reason, she started crying. Some days ago, a phone call
Criminal Revision No.764 of 2009.
-3-
came from his sister and brother in law Ashok Kumar to send a
coloured television and that demand was met with. Ashok Kumar,
his brother-in-law and his sister came to their house on 2.12.2007
and went after saying to his parents and his brother that Rekha
should be sent with Rs.5 lacs because he wanted to start business.
He has further disclosed that in case Rs.5 lacs were not arranged,
then Rekha be kept at her parental home. That fact was told by
Rekha to her parents and the complainant. On 4.12.2007, his sister
Rekha disclosed everything on telephone and told that she will not
go to Rohtak. On 6.12.2007, a phone call was received at 7-00 AM
from his brother Sanjay that his sister Rekha had committed
suicide by jumping in Mool Chand Johar.
It is further mentioned in the FIR that Rekha has
committed suicide on account of harassment of her husband Ashok
Kumar, mother-in-law Kamla Devi, father-in-law Ishwar and
brothers-in-law Dinesh, Sanjay, Ajay and Vijay.
After the completion of investigation, challan was
presented against Ashok Kumar, Kamla Devi and Ishwar Chand.
During the trial, the complainant has appeared in the
trial Court and thereafter an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C
was moved. The learned trial Court, after going through the record
Criminal Revision No.764 of 2009.
-4-
dismissed the application.
Feeling dis-satisfied with the above-said order, the
complainant has preferred the present Criminal Revision.
The learned counsel for the complainant has submitted
that the names of the persons sought to be summoned as additional
accused find mention in the FIR. The complainant, while appearing
as a witness has further stated that persons sought to be served as
accused have also molested his sister. So, the trial Court has
wrongly dismissed the application for summoning the above-said
persons as accused.
A prayer has been made for setting aside the impugned
order and for summoning the persons mentioned in the application
as additional accused.
The learned trial Court has observed that in view of
authority in case Kailash Versus State of Rajasthan and
another, 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 200, power under Section 319
Cr.P.C should be sparingly used. From the perusal of FIR, it is
revealed that only general allegations have been made that Dinesh,
Sanjay, Ajay and Vijay @ Viju were also maltreating the deceased.
The Investigating Agency, after investigation, came to the
conclusion that no case is made out and the said persons have been
Criminal Revision No.764 of 2009.
-5-
placed in column No.2. Specific allegations are against Ashok
Kumar, Kamla Devi and Ishwar Chand. Only passing reference has
been made in the FIR that Rekha committed suicide due to
harassment on petty matters by these persons. The exaggeration
made in the Court by the petitioner that two of the persons sought
to be summoned molested Rekha is an after thought version and
does not find place any where in the FIR. Persons can be
summoned as accused only if there are fair chances of their
conviction. On the basis of general allegations of demand at one
place, the accused cannot be convicted. Moreover, power to
summon under Section 319 Cr.P.C has to be used sparingly. The
demand of Rs.5 lacs has also been attributed to Ashok Kumar,
husband of Rekha. So, in these circumstances, I do not see any
infirmity in the order dated 19.1.2009.
Consequently, this Criminal Revision is without any
merit and the same stands dismissed.
March 25,2009. ( K. C. Puri ) Jaggi Judge