Dismissed

Rajbahadur and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2024A482/22066/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the plea to quash proceedings in a dowry harassment case, holding that prima facie allegations of confinement and assault were sufficient and questions of fact must be decided by the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash charge-sheet and notices was dismissed.

Rajbahadur and Another vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:119867

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22066 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rajbahadur And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 19.12.2021 and cognizance/summoning order dated 24.05.2022, of Case No. 61106 of 2022, arising out of case crime no. 0093 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 506, 494 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC-I, (C.A.W.), Ghaziabad.

¶8

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and no prima facie case is made out against them. Applicant no. 1 is husband of informant and their marriage has taken place in the year 2007 and out of that marriage, they have one child. The allegations of dowry demand and harassment of informant levelled against the applicants are wholly false. It was submitted that in fact applicant no. 1 has already been granted divorce by ex-parte judgement dated 20.02.2024. It was further submitted that the said case was filed in the year 2018 and after that the first information report of this case has been lodged. Referring to the facts of the matter, it was submitted that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and argued that in the first information report, there are clear allegations that informant was harassed on account of dowry. It was submitted that the impugned proceedings of the case cannot be quashed on the ground that applicant no. 1 has been granted divorce.

¶10

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶11

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.

¶12

In the instant matter, there are allegations against the applicants that they used to harass the informant on account of dowry and they used to force her to take divorce. She has also alleged that when she refused for divorce, she was confined in a room and assaulted and in that connection, police was also informed. Considering the allegations made in the first information report and the material collected during investigation, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the 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. In the instant matter, in view of allegations made in the first information report and the material collected during investigation, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out and the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is liable to be dismissed.

¶13

Accordingly, the instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed .

¶14

Order Date :- 26.7.2024 Anand

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ANAND VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajbahadur and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajbahadur and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Avinash Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ankur Tomar and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Akeel Ahmad and 9 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Devesh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Pooja vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Saif vs State of U.P. and Another