Allahabad High Court
Smt. Rani And 2 Ors. vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 October, 2014
Bench: Naheed Ara Moonis
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 47
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42120 of 2014
Applicant :- Smt. Rani And 2 Ors.
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Shekhar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The instant application has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings of criminal case no. 57 of 2013 under section 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Hathras Junction, district Hathras pending before the court of Judicial Magistrate, Hathras including the charge sheet no. 243 of 2012 dated 21.12.2012 submitted in Case Crime No. 432 of 2012 under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406 IPC and 3/4 Dowlry Probhibition Act, police station Hathrah Junction, district Hathras.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicants that applicant nos. 1, 2 and 3 are married Nanad, Jeth and mother-in-law respectively of opposite party no. 2. The opposite party no. 2 has falsely implicated the applicants on vague allegations that victim was thrashed brutally for non-fulfillment of dowry demanded by the accused persons. The Investigation Officer has submitted the charge sheet in a very pedantic and casual manner, hence the entire proceedings against the applicants pursuant to the charge sheet may be vitiated.
Per contra learned AGA contended that investigation was done in a fair and impartial manner and the Investigating agency collected credible and clinching material on the basis of which charge sheet was submitted on which the court below has taken cognizance.
Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel at the bar and after going though the record of the case, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. The Court below has rightly taken the cognizance against the applicants. There is no illegality or perversity in the order passed by the Court below.
At the stage of issuing process of the court below is not expected to examine and assess in detail the material placed on record. Only this has to be seen whether prima facie cognizable offence is made out or not. The Appex Court has also laid down the guidelines in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal, 1999 SCC (Crl) 426, and State of Bihar Vs. PP Sharma, 1992 SCC (Crl) 192 where the criminal proceedings could be interfered and quashed in exercise of its power envisaged under section 482 Cr.P.C
Having considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, this court does not find any justifiable ground for quashing the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case in exercise of its inherent powers conferred under section 482 Cr.P.C..
In the result, the prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby refused. The application is accordingly dismissed.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30-days from today and apply for bail, then their prayer for bail shall be heard and disposed of in view of decision rendered in the case of Smt. Amrawati and another Vs. State of UP reported in 2005 Cr.LJ, 755 which was approved by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of UP (2009) 4 SCC 437. The applicant nos. 1 and 3 may be released on interim bail after hearing the public prosecutor til their regular bail is decided by the court below. It is further provided that the applicants are at liberty to raise any objection in their defence at appropriate stage by moving discharge application which shall be considered by the court below in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 13.10.2014
SKS
