Chandigarh: Virtually accused the Punjab police for “vague” and “polluted” investigations in cases where someone was ordered for the torture and abuse of his NRI wife who had been Ceraungi in Canada, Punjab and Haryana High Cours suggested the state police to stop registering a criminal case with “mechanical way”.
HC has also expressed concern about pine registration by state police, especially in cases related to harassment for dowry involving NRIS, even without conducting a preliminary investigation into allegations.
Justice Manjari Nehru Kauul from HC has passed this order while canceling the register registered at One Varinder Singh and his parents ordered on June 19, 2019, under the 498-A IPC and related costs regarding dowry harassment at the NRI Police Station, Police Commissioneratis Ludhiana .
Varinder married one Harpreet Kaur of Canada, in July 2013 in Ludhiana, and joined him in Canada after marriage.
However, the marriage ends with a divorce.
Efforts to criminal cases to embarrass, divorce applicants shall come into force since December 16, 2018, and the provisions of the resolution are also recorded at the Canadian court.
However, on June 19, 2019, a FIR was registered against Varinder and his parents for dowry and harassment by “his wife”.
Allegedly that he experienced mental and physical abuse because he did not get enough dowry.
Looking for the Petitioners, the Petitioner argued that because the marriage was late, FIR was registered even when the terms and conditions, agreed upon by them and the court order of the court, Ontario, Canada, stood obediently with HC told that the marriage was dissolved with approval.
The Petitioner argued that the instant criminal process was none other than HarPreet Kaur’s efforts to harass and embarrass it because he was wrong to show himself as his wife.
It was also stated since his divorce in 2018, he did not visit India and his statement under the 161 CRPC section was recorded by telephone Punjab.
After hearing all parties, HC observed, “Assuming that the divorce factum was hidden by a woman who was a complainant from the Investigation Agency, then gave trust to the proposal made by the Petitioner that he did indeed indeed in a proxy litigation of a lawyer with a sloping motive for revenge on the former Her husband and family …
“