Allahabad High Court
Santosh Rathore vs State Of U.P. And Another on 8 October, 2025
Author: Deepak Verma
Bench: Deepak Verma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:178280
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5124 of 2023
Santosh Rathore
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Gurudeen Vishwakarma, Sudhir Singh Chauhan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A., Surendra Singh
Court No. - 74
HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 24.08.2022 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.1164 of 2022 (State versus Santosh Rathore) arising out of Case Crime No.0122 of 2022, under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.Kotwali Kalpi, District Jalaun, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrare, Kalpi, Jalaun.
3. It is alleged in the FIR that applicant moved a complaint dated 18.11.2021 against the complainant/opposite party no.2 before police authorities and disclosed that applicant's first wife had died before 16 years. The applicant has one daughter Garima Singh and one son aged about 17 years namely Komal Singh from his first wife. Daughter Garima Singh is married with son Komal Singh is student of Class 12th. The complainant/opposite party no.2 used to quarrel with the son of the applicant and tortured him mentally and also threatended to get him involved in forged case. The police of Kotwali Jalaun had lodged a false case before 12 years in which applicant was wrongly sent to jail but said case was found false. Then applicant had lodged a case against the then Investigating Officer of the case. The applicant and his son Komal Singh are being afraid due to coercive nature of the complainant and they are not able to reside in the house.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant next submits that the applicant is husband of the opposite party no.2 and by order of this Court dated 13.02.2023, matter was referred to Mediation & Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad. Both the parties appeared before Mediation & Conciliation Centre in pursuance of Court's order but mediation could not completed and parties could not reach to any agreement. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. From perusal of FIR, no offence under alleged section is made out. Applicant is husband and has not made any demand of dowry and there is no such allegation in the FIR that the applicant has been harassed on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and it is alleged in the FIR that the applicant was engaged in tantrik activities. Sometimes he put sindoor and bitten lemon in the room of the informant and sometime he put eggs and wine clove at the door of her room. He next submitted that such type of allegation could not come under the offence under section 498-A. Learned counsel for the applicant next submitted that date and time of the incident has not mentioned in the FIR. He next submitted that Investigating Officer has not collected material evidence against the applicant to prosecute the applicant in the present case. All allegations alleged in the FIR is false and baseless. Since date and time of the incident has not mentioned in the FIR, medical examination report is not relevant in the eye of law.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant opposed the argument raised by applicant's counsel and submitted that the applicant who is husband of the informant/opposite party no.2 since last six months, which is evident from the contents of FIR that he is not providing food and other materials for requirement of regular life of opposite party no.2 and act of the applicant by putting bitten lemon and sindoor in the midnight at the door of her room and put eggs and wine clove at the door of her room is a kind of torture, which shows the magic and sorcery activities, in which the applicant is involved and is not the behaviour of natural person. He next submitted that the injury report dated 09.06.2022 shows contusion present of left hip size 4.0 cm x 2.5 cm bluish in colour, contusion present of left hip size 4.0 cm.x 2.5 cm. bluish in colour and contusion present caused by hard and blunt object, simple in nature duration 5-6 days old. Injury report prima-facie discloses offence against the applicant.
5. The grounds taken in the application reveal that many of them relate to disputed question of fact. This Court is of the view that it is well settled that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court. This Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. It is also settled by the Apex Court in catena of judgments that The impugned criminal proceeding against the applicants is abuse of the process of the Court and is liable to be quashed by this Court.the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at pre-trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but it has to be used sparingly, only in such an appropriate cases, where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the criminal proceedings or where allegations made in First Information Report or charge-sheet and the materials relied in support of same, on taking their face value and accepting in their entirety do not disclose the commission of any offence against the accused. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage.
6. Considering the argument raised by applicants' counsel and perused the record, it is evident that prima facie offence is made out. The Apex Court in its judgment passed in the case of Manik B. Vs. Kadapala Sreyes Reddy and another, 2023 Live Law (SC) 642, para 6 and 7 are quoted herein below:-
"6. Whether the testimony of the witnesses is trustworthy or not has to be found out from the examination-in-chief and the cross-examination of the witnesses when they stand in the box at the stage of such trial.
7. Such an exercise, in our considered view, is not permissible while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C."
7. In view of the above, in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the matters of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, Manik B. Vs. Kadapala Sreyes Reddy & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 642, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283, no ground for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case, is made out which may call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the same do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity.
8. From the record, it is apparent that the applicant, who his husband of the informant, engaged in mental torture of opposite party by conducting tantrik activities and the injury report also demonstrate cruelty caused by the applicant against opposite party no.2. Prima-facie offence is made out against the applicant. Moreover, opportunity was given to the opposite party no.2 by referring the matter to the mediation and conciliation center but same could not be materialized by the parties. On perusal of material evidence available on record, offence is made out against the applicant. No interference is warranted. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Deepak Verma,J.)
October 8, 2025
SKD
