TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 1603
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r any other relief(s), which may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The allegation, as per the complaint, is that the complainant, Nigar Naz (Respondent no.2 herein) was married with petitioner no.1, Md. Nausad Khan @ Md. Naushad Khan on 16.02.2012 as per Muslim rites and customs. There was demand of 2 lacs towards dowry at the time of marriage. However, marriage was somehow solemnized and thereafter, the complainant joined the matrimonial home of her husband. However, as per allegation, at matrimonial home, she was not treated like a bride on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry of 2 lacs and an Alto car. She was always taunted causing mental cruelty to her and she was told that she would be treated like a servant till she fulfilled the demand of dowry. For 15 days, she was deprived of food and after much request, she was taken back to her Maike by her husband and just after one day, she was again taken back to his matrimonial home by her husband. She was also subjected to assault by legs and fists and she was made to wash their clothes. In April, 2012, she was taken back to her Maike by her mother, but she was not taken care of by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by Ld. Magistrate before taking cognizance shows that there is not even whisper of any allegation against the petitioner nos. 2 to 5. The complainant, who is alleged victim, has not uttered even a single word against these petitioners regarding demand of dowry and torture or snatching of any property. He further submits that though two of the witnesses have made same statements against these petitioners, such statement has not much value for want of any statements of the alleged victim/complainant. Statements of other witnesses are in the nature of corroborative evidence. But when there is no allegation by the victim herself, there is no much value of such witnesses. Moreover, even such statements of other witneses are scant and vague against these petitioners, as per which no prima facie case under Sections 498(A), 504 and 379 of the IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act is made out. He further submits that Hon'ble Supreme Court has time and again reiterated that in case of want of any specific allegation against the in-laws, they should not be made to face criminal trial. He refers to Kahkashan Kausar @Sonam & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. [(2022) 6 SCC 599], wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....punishable under Sections 420 & 409 of the Penal Code, 1860. The proceeding arose on account of certain financial irregularities detected in a Cooperative Bank of which the appellant was posted as a Branch Manager. The ground on which the High Court has dismissed the quashing plea is that chargesheet had been submitted subsequent to filing of the quashing petition. On that basis, the High Court came to the conclusion that the criminal writ petition had become infructuous. 3. We do not agree with the reasoning of the High Court for dismissing the writ petition of the appellant, having regard to the ratio of the judgment of this Court delivered on 04.07.2011 in the case of Joseph Salvaraj A. v. State of Gujarat, (2011) 7 SCC 59. That was a case arising from the quashing plea of an F.I.R., where chargesheet was submitted after institution of the petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. A Coordinate Bench of this Court opined that even if the charge sheet had been filed, the Court could still examine if offences alleged to have been committed were prima facie made out or not on the basis of the F.I.R., chargesheet and other documents." 11. In Abhi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er-in-law and brother-in-law Mohamed Ajmir Saribu alone harassed me by demanding dowry." 6. In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the complainant herself, we see no justifiable reason for the investigating officer to rope in the appellants as well in the charge- sheet. Interestingly, even in the charge-sheet submitted by the investigating officer, she has very categorically stated that insofar as appellants are concerned, they were living in foreign country. In spite thereof, the investigating officer filed charge-sheet against all the persons including the appellants, mechanically and without application of mind. 7. We, accordingly, allow this appeal and quash the charge-sheet insofar as the appellants are concerned. The appeal stands disposed of." 13. In Anand Kumar Mohatta Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2019) 11 SCC 706, Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as follows: "16. There is nothing in the words of this section which restricts the exercise of the power of the Court to prevent the abuse of process of court or miscarriage of justice only to the stage of the FIR. It is settled principle of law that the High Court can exercise jurisdiction under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has been made out against them and still why must they undergo the agony of a criminal trial." 16. In Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Special Judicial Magistrate, (1998) 5 SCC 749, Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as follows: "29. No doubt the Magistrate can discharge the accused at any stage of the trial if he considers the charge to be groundless, but that does not mean that the accused cannot approach the High Court under Section 482 of the Code or Article 227 of the Constitution to have the proceeding quashed against him when the complaint does not make out any case against him and still he must undergo the agony of a criminal trial 30. It is no comfortable thought for the appellants to be told that they could appear before the court which is at a far off place in Ghazipur in the State of Uttar Pradesh, seek their release on bail and then to either move an application under Section 245(2) of the Code or to face trial when the complaint and the preliminary evidence recorded makes out no case against them. It is certainly one of those cases where there is an abuse of the process of the law and the courts and the High Court should not have shied away in exercising ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd the two other witnesses made on oath before the Magistrate. We are clearly of the opinion that the necessary ingredients of any of the offences have not been made out so far as the appellants are concerned. The petition of complaint is a vague one and excepting the bald allegation that the shares of the complainant have been transferred on forged signatures, nothing further has been stated and there is not an iota of material to indicate how all or any of these appellants are involved in the so- called allegation of forgery. The statement of the complainant on oath as well as his witnesses do not improve the position in any manner, and therefore, in our considered opinion, even if the allegations made in the complaint petition and the statement of the complainant and his witnesses are taken on their face value, the offence under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 120-B of the Penal Code, 1860 cannot be said to have been made out. This being the position, the impugned order of the Magistrate taking cognizance of the offence dated 5-2-1996 so far as it relates to the appellants cannot be sustained and the High Court also committed error in not invoking its power under Section 482 of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tratively, untrammelled by any of the observations made by us in the judgment." 19. As such, it emerges that the High Court continues to have power to entertain and act upon the petition filed under Sec 482 CrPC even after change in the stage of the trial. There is nothing in Sec 482 CrPC to restrict the exercise of power only so long as the stage of the proceeding as it was at the time of the petition continues to be the same. It would be travesty of justice to hold that the proceeding initiated against the person can not be interfered with when it reaches its next stage, even if interference is required to prevent the abuse of the process of the court and to meet the ends of justice. It would be grave injustice to subject the petitioner to the agony and travails of the criminal trial. Inherent power of High Court has been saved to advance justice and not to frustrate it. 20. However, when the trial has reached the stage of judgment, it is not desirable to act upon the petition. After the judgment, the petitioner would have liberty to file appeal wherein he may raise all points of law and facts. 21. As such, the submission on behalf of the State and the Informant that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st the accused or the complaint does not disclose the essential ingredients of an offence which is alleged against the accused; (2) Where the allegations made in the complaint are patently absurd and inherently improbable so that no prudent person can ever reach a conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (3) Where the discretion exercised by the Magistrate in issuing process is capricious and arbitrary having been based either on no evidence or on materials which are wholly irrelevant or inadmissible; and (4) Where the complaint suffers from fundamental legal defects, such as, want of sanction, or absence of a complaint by legally competent authority and the like." 28. In Pepsi Foods Limited & Anr. v. Special Judicial Magistrate & Ors., [(1998) 5 SCC 749], Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows: "28. Summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter. Criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course. It is not that the complainant has to bring only two witnesses to support his allegations in the complaint to have the criminal law set into motion. The order of the Magistrate s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has the power to prevent abuse. It would be an abuse of process of the court to allow any action which would result in injustice and prevent promotion of justice. In exercise of the powers the court would be justified to quash any proceeding if it finds that initiation/continuance of it amounts to abuse of the process of court or quashing of these proceedings would otherwise serve the ends of justice. When no offence is disclosed by the report, the court may examine the question of fact. When a report is sought to be quashed, it is permissible to look into the materials to assess what the report has alleged and whether any offence is made out even if the allegations are accepted in toto." 31. In Indian Oil Corpn. v. NEPC India Ltd., [(2006) 6 SCC 736], Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows: "12. The principles, relevant to our purpose are: (i) A complaint can be quashed where the allegations made in 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 the case alleged against the accused. For this purpose, the complaint has to be examined as a whole, but ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed in a criminal prosecution, there is a likelihood of imminent settlement. Any effort to settle civil disputes and claims, which do not involve any criminal offence, by applying pressure through criminal prosecution should be deprecated and discouraged ... " 32. In Inder Mohan Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal, (2007) 12 SCC 1, Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under: "46. The court must ensure that criminal prosecution is not used as an instrument of harassment or for seeking private vendetta or with an ulterior motive to pressurise the accused. On analysis of the aforementioned cases, we are of the opinion that it is neither possible nor desirable to lay down an inflexible rule that would govern the exercise of inherent jurisdiction. Inherent jurisdiction of the High Courts under Section 482CrPC though wide has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution and only when it is justified by the tests specifically laid down in the statute itself and in the aforementioned cases. In view of the settled legal position, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained." 33. It emerges from the aforesaid statutory provisions and the case laws that for taking cogniz....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The Court has, thus, to be careful in summoning distant relatives without there being specific material. Only the husband, his parents or at best close family members may be expected to demand dowry or to harass the wife but not distant relations, unless there is tangible material to support allegations made against such distant relations. Mere naming of distant relations is not enough to summon them in absence of any specific role and material to support such role ..................... " 38. In Kans Raj Vs. State of Punjab [Kans Raj v. State of Punjab, (2000) 5 SCC 207, Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as follows: "5. ... A tendency has, however, developed for roping in all relations of the in-laws of the deceased wives in the matters of dowry deaths which, if not discouraged, is likely to affect the case of the prosecution even against the real culprits. In their over enthusiasm and anxiety to seek conviction for maximum people, the parents of the deceased have been found to be making efforts for involving other relations which ultimately weaken the case of the prosecution even against the real accused as appears to have happened in the instant case." 39. In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cumstances of the case leads us to conclude that the complaint under Section 498-A and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act have been filed as counter-blast to divorce petition proceeding in the State of Michigan by Nayan Chopra. 25. There being no specific allegation regarding any one of the applicants except common general allegation against everyone i.e. "they started harassing the daughter of the applicant demanding additional dowry of rupees one crore" and the fact that all relatives of the husband, namely, father, mother, brother, mother's sister and husband of mother's sister have been roped in clearly indicates that the application under Section 156(3) CrPC was filed with a view to harass the applicants. Further, prior to filing of the application under Section 156(3) CrPC there was no complaint at any point of time by the girl or her father making allegation of demand of any dowry by any one of the applicants. When both Nayan Chopra and Vanshika started living separately since November 2013, had there been any dowry demand or harassment the girl would have given complaint to police or any other authority. Further, in the divorce proceedings at Michiga....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the husband and put pressure on the husband to settle the Matrimonial disputes. Hence, The court is required to be careful in summoning the relatives of the husband without there being specific material against them. General and omnibus allegation against the relatives of the husband is not sufficient to summon them in such criminal complaints. Otherwise, it would be an abuse of the process of the court and travesty of justice. 44. Now, coming to the case on hand, I find that on complaint of the Complainant, Ld. S.D.J.M, Aurangabad, has taken cognizance of offence punishable under Section 498A, 379 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against all the Accused-Petitioners. However, after perusal of the Complaint and the statement of the Complainant made during inquiry under Section 200 CrPC., I find that there is no specific allegation against Petitioners other than Petitioner No.1, who is husband of the Complainant, except naming all the Petitioners as Accused- Persons, and Statement that she has filed Complaint against all the Accused-Petitioners. But, there is no specific statement except Petitioner No.1, who is husband of the Complainan....