High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:167998 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34217 of 2024 Applicant :- Momin And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Kanojia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Kanojia, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Mayank Awasthi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 19.08.2023, summoning order dated 06.10.2023 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 25343 of 2023 (State Vs. Momin and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 404 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, and Section 3/4 Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 against applicant no.1 and under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against applicant nos. 2 to 6, Police Station- Lisari Gate, District-Meerut, pending in the court of C.J.M., Meerut. Brief facts of the case are that an F.I.R. has been lodged on 02.07.2023 at about 22:20 hours under Sections 498A, 323, 354, 376, 511, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C., 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act and 3/4 Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) with the allegations that opposite party no.2 was married with applicant no.1, Momin four years ago according to Muslim Rites and Rituals. The applicants were given dowry as per the capacity and capability of the father of opposite party no.2. All the accused persons as named in the F.I.R. have mentally and physically harassed opposite party no.2 for additional demand of dowry of Rs. 5 lakhs. The family members of opposite party no.2 have deposited Rs.3 lakhs in the account and given Rs. 1.10 Lakhs in cash to the applicants, but the harassment by the applicants did not stop. It has further been alleged that the brother-in-law (Devar) of opposite party no.2 namely Abid had an evil eye upon her. He used to act in an objectional manner with opposite party no.2. On 01.07.2023 at about 12:30 A.M., when opposite party no.2 was all alone in her room, Abid attempted to forcibly rape her and threatened to kill her. When she raised alarm, applicant no.4, namely, Abida,wife of Abid came there and tore her cloths and insulted her. All accused persons tried to strangulate her and she was also beaten by wooden rod with an intention to kill her. They also tried to throw her from the roof. When the persons residing in the neighbourhood came, she was locked in a room by the alleged accused persons. It is further alleged in the F.I.R. that on 02.07.2023 at about 10:30 A.M., all the accused persons caught hold of hair of opposite party no.2 and she was beaten by all the aforesaid persons. She was also beaten by applicant no.1 with wooden rod with an intention to kill her and she became unconscious due to assault as done by her husband. When she regained consciousness, her husband gave her divorce (Tripal Talak) at the instance of his family members. The opposite party no.2 managed to call her family members as she had sustained serious injuries, and the present F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicants. After investigation charge-sheet has been submitted on 19.08.2023 against the applicants and on the same the learned Special C.J.M., Meerut has taken cognizance on 06.10.2023 and the case was numbers as Case No. 25343 of 2023 and summoned the applicant to face trial. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present case has been lodged with false and frivolous allegations against the husband and his entire family. He further submits that all the allegations of assault are against husband who has already been enlarged on bail. There is material contradiction in the version of the F.I.R. as well as in the statements of opposite party no.2 under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. as recorded go to prove that a false story has been build up by opposite party no.2 to falsely implicate the entire family. The medical examination report, X-ray report and supplementary medial record annexed as Annexure No. 3 and 4 show that the injuries as sustained by opposite party no.2 are simple in nature and it cannot be believed that such injuries would have been caused by all the family members. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. He, therefore, submits that the charge-sheet, summoning order as well as entire proceedings be quashed by this Court as the same is an abuse process of Court. Learned A.G.A. for the State have opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants by submitting that there are specific allegations against all the family members in the F.I.R. as well as in the statements of opposite party no.2 recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and there is no major contradiction. The nature of injuries also prove that opposite party no.2 has been harassed and had beaten by her husband and his family members. He further submits that all the contentions raised by the applicants' counsel relate to disputed questions of fact. On the basis of material on record after conducting of statutory investigation under Chapter XII Cr.P.C. by the investigating officer, a strong prima facie case is made out against the applicants for the commission of the alleged incident. In support of his case, learned AGA has placed reliance upon the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Dilbag Rai Vs. State of Haryana & Others reported in AIR 2019 (SC) 693 and Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Arvind Khanna reported in MANU/SC/1432/2019. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present application. This Court finds that the submissions made by the applicants' learned counsel call for adjudication on pure questions of fact which may adequately be adjudicated upon only by the trial court and while doing so even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court in this case. The issue whether it is appropriate for this Court being the Highest Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the charge-sheet and the proceedings at the stage when the Magistrate has merely issued process against the applicants and trial is to yet to come only on the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicants that present criminal case initiated by opposite party no.2 are not only malicious but also abuse of process of law has elaborately been discussed by the Apex Court in the following judgments:- (i) R.P. Kapur Versus State of Punjab; AIR 1960 SC 866, (ii) State of Haryana & Ors. Versus Ch. Bhajan Lal & Ors.;1992 Supp.(1) SCC 335, (iii) State of Bihar & Anr. Versus P.P. Sharma & Anr.; 1992 Supp (1) SCC 222, (iv) Zandu Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd. & Ors. Versus Mohammad Shariful Haque & Anr.; 2005 (1) SCC 122, (v) M. N. Ojha Vs. Alok Kumar Srivastava; 2009 (9) SCC 682, (vi) Mohd. Allauddin Khan Vs. The State of Bihar & Others; 2019 0 Supreme (SC) 454, (vii) Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.; 2020 0 Supreme (SC) 45, and laslty (viii) Rajeev Kaurav Vs. Balasahab & Others; 2020 0 Supreme (SC) 143. In view of the aforesaid, this Court does not deem it proper, and therefore cannot be persuaded to have a pre-trial before the actual trial begins. A threadbare discussion of various facts and circumstances, as they emerge from the allegations made against the accused, is being purposely avoided by the Court for the reason, lest the same might cause any prejudice to either side during trial. But it shall suffice to observe that the perusal of the F.I.R. and the material collected by the Investigating Officer on the basis of which the charge sheet has been submitted makes out a prima facie case against the accused at this stage and there appear to be sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. I do not find any justification to quash the charge sheet or the proceedings against the applicants arising out of them as the case does not fall in any of the categories recognized by the Apex Court which may justify their quashing. The prayer for quashing the impugned charge-sheet dated 19.08.2023 and summoning order dated 06.10.2023 as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case are refused, as I do not see any abuse of the court's process at this pre-trial stage. The present application has no merit and is, accordingly, rejected. Order Date :- 22.10.2024 Abhishek Singh