Bilal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:54323

Court No. - 71

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 11204 of 2025

Applicant :- Bilal And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Naushad 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 under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as BNSS) has been filed for quashing of entire proceedings, including summoning order dated 01.12.2023, of Complaint Case No.23505/09 of 2023 (Smt. Aaisha Vs. Bilal and Another), under Section 406 I.P.C., Police StationThana Bhawan, District- Shamli, pending before the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Shamli.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicant no.1 is husband and applicant no.2 is mother-in-law of opposite party no.2 and that no offence under Section 406 IPC is made out. The opposite party no.2 has left her matrimonial home at her own and she is at liberty to take back her stridhan from her matrimonial home. Applicants have never refused to return her stridhan . The allegation that applicant no.1 has pronounced triple talaq is false and the same is not supported by any evidence. Learned counsel submitted that ingredients of Section 406 IPC are not made out. Learned Magistrate has not considered facts of the matter in correct perspective and committed error by summoning the applicants-accused. Referring to facts of the matter, it was

¶9

submitted that no prima-facie case is made out against the applicants and thus impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in view of allegations made in the complaint and statement of complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and of witnesses recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C., a prima-facie case is made out against the applicants.

¶11

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶12

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 , Hon'ble 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.

¶13

In the instant matter, perusal of record shows that opposite party no.2 is wife of applicant no.1. She has lodged impugned complaint against applicants alleging that she was married with applicant no.1 about six years prior to the lodging of the impugned complaint and that she was harassed on account of dowry. The

¶14

opposite party no.2 has further alleged that various articles, including fridge, cooler, A.C., bed, sofa, furniture and jewellery etc. were given in dowry and that her husband has divorced her by way of tiple talaq. She has further alleged that applicants are not returning her dowry articles/ stridhan despite repeated demands. In her statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. also, she has alleged that her dowry articles/ stridhan are not being returned and the same is being damaged by them. The version of complainant is further supported by the witnesses examined under Section 202 Cr.P.C. In view of material on record, it can not be said that no prima-facie case under Section 406 IPC is made out. 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. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version, does not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS.

¶15

After considering arguments raised by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned complaint and the materials in support of the same, this Court does not find it to be a case which can be determined or gone into in an application under Section 528 BNSS. In view of material on record no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. Hence, the present application under Section 528 BNSS is liable to be dismissed.

¶16

Accordingly, the application u/s 528 BNSS is hereby dismissed . Order Date :- 15.4.2025 'SP'/-

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases