High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:23072 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39528 of 2024
Legal Reasoning
Applicant :- Ram Kumar Savita And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akshay Prakash Srivastava,Dharmendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Mr. D.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to stay the effect and operation of the order dated 3.10.2024 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi in Case No. 8344 of 2023 (State vs. Saurabh Savita and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 213 of 2022, under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Kotwali Jhansi, District-Jhansi. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that earlier the applicants Saurabh Savita and three others had filed application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 22653 of 2023 with the prayer to quash the impugned chargesheet dated 24.6.2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 0213 of 2022 when the applicants have been summoned by order dated 9.5.2023. The said application was disposed of by another Bench of this Court, vide order dated 21.06.2023, which is as follows:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. This application has been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 24.06.2022 registered as Crl. Case No. 8344 of 2023 (State Vs. Saurabh Savita and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 0213 of 2022 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, Police Station Kotwali, District Jhansi, pending before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi as well as to quash the summoning order dated 09.05.2023 passed in the aforesaid case. The contentions raised by the applicants' counsel is that there is a dispute in between the parties. There are chances of amicable settlement between the parties. Applicants' counsel urged that this case may be referred for mediation so that the parties may have a chance to settle their dispute on their own terms through mediation. In such circumstances, it is directed that both the parties shall appear before the court below and file an application for settling the dispute through mediation. In case such an application is filed before the court below for settling the dispute through mediation, the court concerned shall pass an appropriate order within a week from the date of filing such an application. The mediation centre will decide the same within a period of four months. For a period of five months, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicants in the above mentioned case. It is further directed that in case mediation process between the parties fails, the court below shall be free to proceed further with the matter against the applicants and in case mediation succeeds, the applicants shall be free to approach this Court.
Decision
With the above observation, this application is disposed of." 4. He further submits that an application was moved before the court concerned for compliance of the order but the matter was never referred to mediation centre by the concerned court, however the court concerned on 28.8.2023 mentioning about the order dated 21.6.2023 has granted protection to the applicants, however has not referred the matter to mediation centre. Placing the entire order sheet he further submits that several applications have been moved for compliance of the aforesaid order but the concerned court did not take open to refer the matter before the mediation centre and the impugned order dated 9.5.2024 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi is illegal, arbitrary and against law. He also submits that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a mala fide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He, therefore, submits that the charge-sheet, summoning order as well as entire proceedings be quashed by this Court as the same is nothing but abuse of process of law. 5. Learned A.G.A. submits that the petition is not maintainable with the aforesaid prayer as no prayer has been made to quash the order dated 3.10.2024. He further submits that there is nothing on record to show that any application was moved by the parties for settling the dispute through mediation as the application has been moved by an advocate, which is evident from page no. 49 and another application dated 10.10.2024 has also been moved by applicant's counsel, which is evident from page no. 69 of the paper book. He also submits that instead of approaching the Court in proper form and not complying with the order dated 21.6.2023 the applicants have not approached this Court in a fair manner. He further submits that it is clear from the order dated 21.6.2023 that on the request of learned counsel for the applicants, both the parties were directed to appear before the court concerned and file an application for settling their dispute through mediation but there is nothing on record to show that the parties have ever appeared before the court concerned and have moved application in this regard. Even if, it is taken to be true that an application has been moved on behalf of the applicant but on the same there is no signature of opposite party no. 2, which is again non a compliance of the order dated 21.6.2023. He further submits that all the contentions raised by the applicants' counsel relates 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 applicant 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. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present application. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. The prayer for quashing the order dated 3.10.2024 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi 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. 10. The present application has no merit and is, accordingly, rejected. Order Date :- 17.2.2025 Faridul Digitally signed by :- FAREEDUL HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad