High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRR/3309/2016dismissed

Suresh v. Rajbir And ANR

2018-10-15Mrs. Justice Anita Chaudhry2 pages

Crl. Revision No. M-3309 of 2016 -1In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 3309 of 2016 Date of Decision: 15.10.2018 Suresh ......Petitioner

Versus

Rajbir and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY

Present:

Mr. Sudhir Rana, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** ANITA CHAUDHRY, J This is the complainant's revision aggrieved by the judgments passed by both the Courts below.

An FIR was registered in 2010. Only the husband was challaned and the trial ended in acquittal. The trial Court found that there were allegations of constant beatings but no medical to support. The complainant had referred to some panchayats but no panchayat member was examined.

Aggrieved by the acquittal, an appeal was preferred before the Sessions Court. The First Appellate Court found that there was no demand before marriage and that the complainant had made improvements at the trial. It also noted that though the complainant had stated that she had taken treatment from Dr. Prabhu Dayal but she could not produce any receipt to show that she was beaten or that she had taken any treatment. The Court noted that several cases had been got registered by the complainant against GURPREET SINGH 2018.10.29 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

Crl. Revision No. M-3309 of 2016 -2the husband. The appeal was dismissed.

Lower Courts record was summoned.

I have heard the counsel for the petitioner at great length and I find no illegality in the order passed by the Courts below. The evidence had been rightly appreciated. The complainant had failed to lead evidence to support the allegations made by her. There was no evidence that she had been beaten up. There was no evidence also that any panchayat was held. The complainant even failed to give the names of the panchayat members and only the complainant and the daughter were examined. Sweeping allegations were made by the complainant. She could not specify the date and time and the articles which were demanded. The trial had rightly ended in acquittal. I find no infirmity in the orders. The petition is dismissed in limine.

Lower Courts record be sent back.

(ANITA CHAUDHRY) JUDGE October 15, 2018 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No GURPREET SINGH 2018.10.29 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh