SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt. Manju And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 February, 2024

Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member services — Free for one month.

Allahabad High Court

Smt. Manju And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 February, 2024

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Neutral Citation No. – 2024:AHC:25147

Court No. – 92

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 43231 of 2023

Applicant :- Smt. Manju And Another

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Rajrshi Gupta,Rizwan Ahamad,Sr. Advocate

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Prashant Kumar,J.

1. Heard Sri Rajrshi Gupta, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Pankaj Kumar, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed praying for quashing the charge sheet no.205/23 dated 04.05.2023 and entire proceeding of Case No.17626 of 2023 (State Vs. Jitendra Kumar and others), arising out of Case Crime No.109 of 2023, Police Station Khair, District Aligarh, based on the impugned charge sheet pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh, under Sections 498A, 323, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and the cognizance order dated 16.05.2023 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the victim, who were living separately in Aligarh whereas the victim was staying with her husband at Chennai. He further submits that there is delay in lodging of FIR and the allegation of demand of dowry in the form of Rs.6 lacs and a motorcycle is false. He further submits that mistakenly the victim had consumed acid kept in the bottle of bisleri bottle for cleaning the toilet due to which she passed away. He further submits that the applicants have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. Further submission is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider as no prima facie case is made out against the applicants. He also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the application and contended that as per FIR the victim was being tortured for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry in the form of cash and motorcycle due to which she administered poison and passed away. He further submits that insofar as the delay in lodging the FIR is concerned, the parents of the victim were busy in her treatment, so they could not lodge the FIR promptly. It is further submitted that the Court below has rightly summoned the applicants and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings.

5. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court.

6. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 has laid down the guidelines under which circumstances the Court should, in its inherent power, entertain an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The guidelines are as follows:-

“(i) 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.

(ii) 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.

(iii) 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.

(iv) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.

(v) 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.

(vi) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (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 Act concerned, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.

(vii) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fides 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.”

7. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, 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 has held that only those cases in which no prima facie case is made out can be considered in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

8. The instant application does not fall under the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgements mentioned above, and followed in a number of matters. Moreover, the facts as alleged cannot be said that, prima facie, no offence is made out against the applicants. It is only after the evidence and trial, it can be seen as to whether the offence, as alleged, has been committed or not.

9. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 13.2.2024

S.P.

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine


All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

Recent Comments

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2024 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation