Criminal Case No. 1101 of 2023 · High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:113514 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17428 of 2024 Applicant :- Rakesh Bind @ Rakesh Kumar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Shukla,Arun Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 24.12.2022 and summoning order dated 19.03.2024, of Criminal Case No. 1101 of 2023 (State vs. Rakesh Bind and Others), arising out Case Crime No. 172 of 2022, under Sections - 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 354, 376, 377, 313 I.P.C. and Section - 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Bansdeeh Road, District - Ballia, pending before the court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Ballia. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for applicants that
Legal Reasoning
applicants are innocent and no prima facie case is made out against them. Applicants are husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law of opposite party no.2/informant. The first information report was lodged by the opposite party no.2 making false and baseless allegations and the entire family members of applicants were named. The allegations of dowry demand and harassment of opposite party no.2 levelled against applicants are wholly false. In fact, the opposite party no.2 was having relationship with one Police Constable, namely, Mannu Ram Bind. Said Mannu Ram Bind and opposite party no.2 have planned to extort money from the applicants. Earlier the opposite party no.2 has also filed a case for maintenance. The opposite party no.2 and said constable Mannu Ram Bind were continuously in touch through phone. After filing maintenance case, opposite party no.2 has left the house of applicants in order to live with her friend Mannu Ram Bind. Between 16.07.2022 to 17.07.2022 several calls and message have been exchanged between them. Said constable Mannu Ram Bind was posted as gunner of District Magistrate, Ballia and that first information report was got lodged by said Mannu Ram Bind and after investigation charge-sheet was submitted in a routine manner. In medical examination report, no injury has been shown on the person of opposite party no.2. Several independent witnesses have submitted affidavits to the effect that no such incident has taken place. The applicant no.1 has already filed a case of divorce on ground of adultery. The applicants enjoy good financial status and it is improbable that they would have make any demand of dowry. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in the first information report there are clear allegations that after marriage of opposite party no.2 with applicant no.1, all the accused persons have harassed her on account of dowry and they used to demand Rs.2 lakhs cash and one motorcycle and that on 18.10.2019 she was assaulted and turned out from her matrimonial home by the accused persons. It is further submitted that due to intervention of some persons on 02.11.2019, she came to her matrimonial home but she was again harassed by the accused persons and on 23.03.2020 she was again turned out from her matrimonial home. She has further alleged that applicant no.3 has molested the opposite party no.2. The husband of opposite party no.2 was having relations with one other lady. Referring to first information report, it was submitted that there are specific allegations against applicant nos.2 and 3 and that a prima facie case is made out against all the accused-applicants. 5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 6. The legal position on the issue of quashing of criminal proceedings is well-settled that the jurisdiction to quash a complaint, FIR or a charge-sheet should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases. However, where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and material on record even if taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the charge-sheet may be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. In well celebrated judgement reported in AIR 1992 SC 605 State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal, Supreme Court has carved out certain guidelines, wherein FIR or proceedings may be quashed but cautioned that the power to quash FIR or proceedings should be exercised sparingly and that too in the rarest of rare cases. In this connection, a reference may also be made to the case of R. Kalyani vs. Janak C. Mehta and Others, 2009 (1) SCC 516, Rupan Deol Bajaj vs. K.P.S. Gill (1995) SCC (Cri) 1059, Rajesh Bajaj vs. State of NCT of Delhi, (1999) 3 SCC 259 and Medchl Chemicals & Pharma (P) Ltd vs. Biological E Ltd. & Ors, 2000 SCC (Cri) 615. It has been held that if a prima facie case is made out disclosing ingredients of the offence, court should not quash the charge sheet/complaint. It is equally well settled that at this stage questions of fact cannot be examined and a mini trial cannot be held. In the instant matter, in view of the allegations made in the first information report and material collected during investigation, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against applicants. The submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants call for determination on questions of fact, which may adequately be discerned/adjudicated only by the trial court. Even the submissions made on point of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court. Hence, the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and the same is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 16.7.2024 S Rawat