Allahabad High Court
Khushlal Gaur vs The State Of U.P And Ors. on 8 July, 2019
Bench: Chandra Dhari Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 28
Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 3750 of 2013
Applicant :- Khushlal Gaur
Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P And Ors.
Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Singh Chauhan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.
This petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred for quashing the charge-sheet no.399 of 2010 dated 10.09.2010 arising out of case crime no.694 of 2010 under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P. S. Ghazipur, District Lucknow.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the marriage of daughter of respondent no.3 namely Smt. Shakuntala was solemnized with one Sri Shyam Chandra on 27.04.2009. It has also been submitted that looking to the behaviour of Smt. Shakuntala, Shyam Chandra filed a suit under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for divorce. After receiving the notices of the Suit, the respondent no.3 lodged a false first information report against Sri Shyam Chandra and all his family members including the present applicant who is only the mediator of the marriage, however, he has no concerned with any demand of dowry. Learned counsel also submits that in the first information report as also in the charge - sheet, no specific allegations have been made against the applicant. He has pointed out that in the statement of the victim, which is placed on record as Annexure 5 to the petition, there are no allegations against the petitioner and it is mentioned that the petitioner is the neighbour of respondent no.3 and he was the mediator of the marriage. It has further been submitted that there are no evidence against the petitioner and the investigating officer without any evidence has submitted the charge-sheet against the petitioner and the court below has taken the cognizance without applying its judicial mind and without appreciation of the entire facts. Lastly, he submits that the entire proceedings is nothing but an abuse of the process of the law and is malice prosecution against the petitioner.
On the other hand, learned AGA for the State has opposed the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that after collecting the sufficient evidence, the police has filed the charge-sheet and the learned Magistrate has taken the cognizance in the case after satisfying that prima-facie case is made out against the petitioner.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
It is admitted case of the petitioner that the petitioner is not the family member of the husband and he is only the mediator of marriage. In the first information report, there are no allegations against the petitioner. Hon'ble the Apex Court in number of cases held that the relatives should not be roped in the case of matrimonial disputes on the basis of omnibus allegations unless specific instances of their involvement in the crime are made out.
In the cases related to demand of dowry, general and vague allegations cannot be treated as sufficient material to prosecute the other relatives who otherwise, do not have anything to do with the family affairs of the complainant. In order to prosecute the other relatives in a dowry case, there must be some specific allegations against them.
Considering the precedents laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of Kans Raj v. State of Punjab, (2000) 5 SCC 207 andMonju Roy v. State of West Bengal, (2015) 13 SCC 693, the Court observed that it would not be correct to compel the applicants who are the near relatives of accused to face the agony of criminal prosecution on vague allegations. The Court also stated that all general allegations leveled on the applicant appears to be indistinct. Therefore it is a clear case of over-implication on near relatives.
In view of the above, I am satisfied that the present criminal proceedings is nothing but is a gross misuse of the process of law. Therefore, the charge-sheet and criminal prosecution, so far as it relates to the petitioner Khushlal Gaur, is hereby quashed.
The petition is allowed.
Order Date :- 8.7.2019
VNP/-
