The High Court of Jharkhand dismissed an application to quash criminal proceedings against the petitioner. The court held that due to the nature of allegations involving torture and ongoing investigation, there was no cause for interference at this stage.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
Cr. M.P. No. 223 of 2016
Halima Khatoon ... ... ... Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Zainab @ Farhat Isar ... ... ... Opp. Parties
CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
............ For the Petitioner : Mr. Mohammad Asghar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, A.P.P.
2/14.09.2016 Heard Mr. Mohammad Asghar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.
In this application, petitioner has prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 650 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. No. 2630 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323/406/498(A)/504 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that allegations against the petitioner who is mother-in-law is vague and general in nature. It has been submitted that petitioner is aged about 78 years and prior to institution of the complaint case, husband of the informant has already instituted a case for restitution of conjugal rights. Merely because petitioner is mother-in-law of the informant, she has been implicated in this case.
Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer made by the petitioner and has submitted that investigation is going on and at this stage it would be premature to come to the conclusion that any offence against the petitioner is made out or not.
It appears that in the complaint petition, which was originally filed, allegation has been made against the petitioner of perpetuating mental and physical torture upon opposite party No. 2. Although it has been strenuously argued by learned counsel for the petitioner with respect to the age of the petitioner, but in view of the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner and that the investigation into the offence is still going on, there is no cause for interference in the criminal proceeding and therefore having found no merit in this application, same is hereby dismissed.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)
Binit
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petition for quashing criminal proceedings against a 78-year-old mother-in-law should be allowed due to vague allegations and premature investigation.
Whether mental and physical torture allegations against the petitioner make the quashing application unmeritorious.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Halima Khatoon
The State of Jharkhand
Zainab @ Farhat Isar
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
