← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRR/1147/2018dismissed

Shish Kaur & ANR v. State Of Haryana

2018-09-27Mr. Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRR-1147-2018 Date of decision: 27.09.2018 Shish Kaur and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

***** CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:

Mr. Hakam Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners.

**** JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL) This revision petition has been filed seeking to challenge the impugned order dated 18.01.2018 by which the charges have been framed against the petitioners under Sections 406, 498-A, 506 and 313 read with Section 34 IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that marriage was solemnized by the complainant Lovika with Rohit son of Ravi Kumar. It is contended that Rohit and complainant were residing separately as would be evident from the rent agreement which is available on the record as Annexure P-3. A complaint came to be filed against Lovika by petitioner No.2 on 11.02.2017 and thereafter a divorce petition was filed by Rohit on 18.03.2017. As a counter-blast thereto, the instant FIR was got registered on 22.04.2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner herein would SATYAWAN 2018.10.01 10:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CRR-1147-2018 -2contend that in the FIR, it is mentioned that an abortion took place on 22.06.2016 in which there are signatures of the complainant herself agreeing to the abortion. Offence under Section 313 IPC. is not made out against the petitioners herein, who are the mother-in-law and the sister-inlaw of the complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks a challenge to the said sections in the FIR.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. On the last date of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners herein was directed to inform the Court as to how many witnesses have been examined on that date. Today, this Court is informed that prosecution evidence is underway and the main witness, namely the complainant has already been examined.

In view of this, no ground is made out to interfere in the matter. Dismissed.

27.09.2018 (JAISHREE THAKUR) Satyawan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes.

Whether reportable No.

SATYAWAN 2018.10.01 10:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh