1. Om Prakash aged about 68 years son of Late Gupteshwar Prasad 2. Archana v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
Cr. M.P. No.3612 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.3612 of 2023 ------ 1. Om Prakash aged about 68 years son of Late Gupteshwar Prasad 2. Archana Prakash aged about 60 years wife of Sri Om Prakash Both are residents of Pragati Puram Shyama Apartment, Bailey Road, Patna, P.O. and police station- Rupaspur District- Patna (Bihar) … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ For the Petitioners For the State
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Abhay Kr. Chaturvedy, Advocate : Mr. Sunil Kr. Dubey, Addl.P.P. ------ P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties. 2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash and set aside the F.I.R. as well as the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Daltanganj Town P.S. Case No.233 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau. 3. The brief fact of the case is that the petitioners are respectively the father- in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant/informant. The complainant/informant filed Complaint Case No.739 of 2023 in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj alleging therein that the petitioners received dowry in connection with the marriage of the complainant with her husband but they are not returning the dowry consisting 1 Cr. M.P. No.3612 of 2023 of ornaments, cash of Rs.6,00,000/- and cash of Rs.5,05,000/- given by the parents of the complainant/informant for purchasing a car for the complainant and other valuables including furniture, utensils, clothes etc. The complaint shows that the only offence punishable under Section 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is made out. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate forwarded the copy of the complaint to the Officer In-Charge of the Daltonganj Town Police Station for lodging the F.I.R. under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. basing upon which Daltanganj Town P.S. Case No.233 of 2023 was registered for the offence punishable under Section 498 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 3/4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no offence punishable under Section 498 of the Indian Penal Code is made out against the petitioners. It is next submitted that in the absence of any allegation of demand of dowry by the petitioners, no offence punishable under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is made out against the petitioners. Hence, it is submitted that the F.I.R. as well as the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Daltanganj Town P.S. Case No.233 of 2023, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau be quashed and set aside against the petitioners. 5. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing and setting aside the F.I.R. as well as the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Daltanganj Town P.S. Case No.233 of 2023, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau and submits that the offence punishable under Sections 3 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is made out against the petitioners. Hence, it is submitted that there is no 2 Cr. M.P. No.3612 of 2023 justifiable reason to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceedings when undisputedly the offence punishable under Sections 3 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is made out against the petitioners. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed. 6. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that true it is that if the allegations made in the complaint which upon being forwarded to police under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C., Daltanganj Town P.S. Case No.233 of 2023 was registered, if treated to be true in its entirety, certainly the offence punishable under Sections 3 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is made out against the petitioners. The investigation of the case as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, is still going on. If during the investigation of the case no offence punishable under any other penal provision of law is made out, certainly the Investigating Officer is expected to take care of the same at the time of submitting the Final Report, but as at least two offences punishable under Sections 3 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is made out against the petitioners, hence, this Court is not inclined at this stage to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceedings, as prayed for by the petitioners; keeping in view the settled principle of law that the High Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure should not stifle a legitimate prosecution as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Monica Kumar (Dr.) & Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Others reported in (2008) 8 SCC 781. 7. In view of the discussions made above, this Court is of the considered view that there is no justifiable reason to quash and set aside the F.I.R. as well 3 Cr. M.P. No.3612 of 2023 as the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Daltanganj Town P.S. Case No.233 of 2023, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau. 8. Accordingly, the prayer to quash and set aside the F.I.R. as well as the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Daltanganj Town P.S. Case No.233 of 2023, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau is rejected. 9. Accordingly, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, is dismissed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 18th of March, 2024 AFR/ Animesh 4