Petition

Hon’ble Court was seized of a Petition under Section 482 CrPC, preferred by Sister-in-Law and Brother-in-Law of Complainant, seeking quashing of a Charge Sheet as also an order passed by ACJM Lucknow taking cognizance, issuing process and registering as Case under Sections 498-A, 427, 506 IPC read with Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and the entire criminal proceedings therein.

Facts of the Case

A FIR was got registered by Complainant Wife against her Husband, Father-in-Law, Mother-in-Law. Sister-in-Law and Brother-in-Law under Sections 498-A, 427, 506 IPC read with Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Upon investigation Police filed a Charge Sheet in March, 2010. Thereupon Magistrate took cognizance and issued process by summoning applicants and other three accused vide order dated 22.07.2010. The Husband meanwhile filed a Divorce Petition Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Petitioners took a plea that they were not residing with other accused persons since after marriage of applicant-1 with applicant-2 they are residing at Bangalore and as such the allegations levelled against applicants are patently false.

On the other hand Counsel for Respondent/Complainant Wife contended that harge-sheet has been submitted by police after making investigation and collecting evidence during investigation and on that basis cognizance has been taken by Magistrate. At this stage, defence of accused persons and their evidence neither was before Court below nor in the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., such defence of accused persons can be looked into by this Court and, therefore, it cannot be said that there is no evidence whatsoever and proceedings are malicious which again is a question of fact and can be decided after evidence is adduced before Trial Court, hence, no interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is justified in the present case.

High Court observations

''In the present case, stage at which applicants have come before this Court is when charge-sheet was submitted by police after investigation and thereupon Magistrate took cognizance and issued process summoning accused applicants along with three accused persons for trial for the offence under Sections 498-A, 427, 506 IPC read with Sections 3/4 of Act, 1961. Admittedly, no evidence has been recorded by Trial Court at the stage when applicants have come to this Court to challenge charge-sheet, order of cognizance and process.

Scope of judicial review at this stage to interfere under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is very limited. If allegations contained in FIR taken to be true, and evidence collected by police is looked into, can it be said that offences under aforesaid Sections in respect whereof cognizance has been taken and process has been issued, are not made out only the Court would interfere otherwise not. Scope of judicial review in such matters has been laid down by Supreme Court time and again and it would be fruitful to have a retrospect of some authorities on the subject.''

Bench relied on Md. Allauddin Khan Vs. The State of Bihar & Others 2019 Latest Caselaw 387 SC, State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335,  Som Mittal Vs. State of Karnataka, 2008 (3) SCC 753, Lakshman vs. State of Karnataka and others, 2019 Latest Caselaw 992 SC, Chilakamarthi Venkateswarlu and Ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors., 2019 Latest Caselaw 620 SC and U.P. Pollution Control Board vs. Mohan Meaking Limited and others, 2000 (3) SCC 745.

High Court Decision

After discussing the facts of the Case in the light of legal precedents Bench observed,

If anyone is involved in the most heinous social evil of dowry, I have no manner of doubt that law must be allowed to take it course with full swing and there should not be any sympathy, compassion or leniency for such person who is indulged in such crime but only on whims and caprice someone who is not accused of any such offence, should not be implicated and undergo an ordeal criminal trial merely for the reason that he or she is relative of the husband and every relative of the husband should be made to teach a lesson. After all, performance of marriage by itself is no offence and if any one is relative of one of the spouse who is alleged to be a guilty of offence of dowry, mere relationship should not be a reason to implicate such person in a criminal proceedings……
In these circumstances, it cannot be said that offences under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 against applicants are made out and, in my view, proceedings, if allowed against applicants will be nothing except but a gross abuse of process of law and ends of justice required that the same must be quashed against applicants.

Accordingly the High Court Bench allowed the quashing Petition qua the Petitioners.

Case Title: Anshu Goel and another vs State of U.P and another
Bench : Justice Sudhir Agarwal
Case No. - 3716 of 2010
Petitioner:- Smt. Anshu Goel And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P And Another
Counsel for Petitioner::- Sh. Saurabh Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate, Sh. Manish Kumar II

Allahabad High Court Judgement on Quashing of Section 498A IPC Case Dated 16.04.2020

 

Share this Document :

Picture Source :