Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 15 June, 2023
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010274822018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet./1270/2018
MOHSIN AHMED AND 4 ORS.
S/O ABDUL JABBAR, R/O VILLAGE AND PO DIGHAILZAR, PS MURAJHAR,
PIN-782439
2: TAHIR AHMED
S/O ABDUL JABBAR
R/O VILLAGE AND PO DIGHAILZAR
PS MURAJHAR
PIN-782439
3: ABDUL MOZID
S/O LATE HAJI RASHID ALI
R/O VILLAGE AND PO DIGHAILZAR
PS MURAJHAR
PIN-782439
4: ABDUL JABBAR
S/O LATE HAJI RASHID ALI
R/O VILLAGE AND PO DIGHAILZAR
PS MURAJHAR
PIN-782439
5: TOYABUN NESSA
S/O ABDUL JABBAR
R/O VILLAGE AND PO DIGHAILZAR
PS MURAJHAR
PIN-782439
DIST. HOJAI
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
REP. BY PP, ASSAM
Page No.# 2/5
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A M MAZUMDAR
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
:: PRESENT ::
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
For the Petitioners : Mr. S.C. Biswas,
Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr. B. Sarma,
Addl. P.P., Assam.
Mr. B. Buragohain,
Advocate.
Date of Hearing : 02.05.2023.
Date of Judgment : 15.06.2023.
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)
Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.
Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor representing the
State of Assam. Mr. B. Buragohain, learned counsel represents the private
respondent.
2. This is an application under Section 482 of the CrPC praying for quashing
the FIR dated 13.07.2018 registered as Murajhar P.S. Case No.272/2018 under
Sections 120(B)/406/384/420 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code (G.R. Case
No.1709/2018).
3. The petitioner no.1 was maintaining relationship with a girl for about 7/8
years. He did not allow the girl to marry another person. Whenever proposals
for marriage came to the girl, the petitioner no.1 would interfere and did not
allow the proposals to proceed further.
Page No.# 3/5
4. Whenever the matter came to the knowledge of the family members of
the girl, they contacted the family members of the petitioner no.1 for marriage.
The family members of the petitioner no.1 also promised that the marriage of
the petitioner no.1 would be solemnised with the said girl.
5. In the meantime, the petitioner no.1 was appointed as a police officer.
The petitioner no.1 allegedly put pressure upon the girl to do her Masters in Arts
and accordingly, she did her Masters in Arts.
6. Thereafter, the petitioner no.1 sent one emissary to the house of the girl
with a proposal of marriage. The family members of the girl agreed to the
proposal and decided to have social marriage on 13.07.2018. All the required
rituals were performed for holding the marriage. The family members of the girl
spent a large amount of money for buying articles for marriage. Even, invitation
cards for the marriage were also distributed.
7. This time, the petitioner no.1 demanded an amount of `10 lakhs and
threatened that if the money is not paid, he would not marry the girl.
8. Narrating the aforesaid facts, the elder brother of the girl lodged the FIR
before police.
9. The petitioner no.1 denied the contents of the FIR. He has claimed that he
was not allowed leave by his higher authorities for solemnisation of his marriage
on 13.07.2018 and therefore, he asked for postponing the marriage.
10. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both
sides.
11. The power under Section 482 of the CrPC is not an appellate power of
the High Court. It is the inherent power of the High Court for preventing the
abuse of the process of the court. The power under Section 482 of the CrPC is
not meant to interfere into the power of a court sub-ordinate to the High Court.
Page No.# 4/5
12. The guidelines for exercising the power under Section 482 of the CrPC has
been laid down by the Supreme Court in the State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal,
AIR 1992 SC 604. Para 102 of the said judgment is quoted as under:
"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of
the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this
Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power
under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which
we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories
of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to
prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of
justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined
and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to
give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be
exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the
complaint, even if they are 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.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other
materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable
offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1)
of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of
Section 155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint
and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the
commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable
offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is
Page No.# 5/5
permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as
contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and
inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever
reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding
against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions
of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is
instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or
where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act,
providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide
and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior
motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite
him due to private and personal grudge."
13. The Supreme Court has laid down that the power under Section 482 of
the CrPC is to be sparingly used. Here, in this case, the trial is proceeding
before the trial court and this Court is of the opinion that the facts and
circumstances of this case, do not constitute a good case for exercising the
power under Section 482 of the CrPC. If the power under Section 482 of the
CrPC is exercised, it would amount to interference into the domain of the trial
court.
14. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court is again of the opinion that this is not
a fit case for exercising power under Section 482 CrpC. Accordingly, the
criminal petition is found to be devoid of merit and stands dismissed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
