GUWAHATI, India, Sept. 23 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Aug. 22:
1. Heard Mr. PK Roychoudhury, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. M.P. Goswami, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam representing Respondent No.1 as well as Mr. S. Das, the learned counsel representing Respondent No.2.
2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code praying for quashing the Charge Sheet No.87/2020 dated 22.10.2020 relating to All Women Police Station case No.12/2018. 3. On 31.01.2018, the Respondent No.2 had lodged an FIR before police narrating the following facts -
3.1. After her marriage in the year 2008, since the year 2014, she has been living with her husband Kalyan Kumar Sarma and his parents. Her husband demanded dowry from her. On one occasion, while she was wearing a nylon nighty, he allegedly tried to burn her by burning her nighty with a burning cigarette. She got injured. Her neck and the left hand was badly burnt. She was not given any treatment, rather she was taken to a hotel at Basistha where she was confined till the end of the year 2014.
3.2. According to the respondent, her mother-in-law and her husband used to demand dowry. Even then, her mother-in-law had allowed her to enter into the house along with her three years old son.
3.3. The list of the allegations is endless.
4. On the basis of the said FIR, police registered the case and filed the charge sheet against the present petitioners.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides.
6. On a plain reading of the FIR, I find that there are elements of a prima facie criminal case against the petitioners. The guidelines for consideration of a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC have been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604. Paragraph 102 of the judgment reads 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 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."
7. Reverting to the case in hand, this Court is of the opinion that there are elements of a prima facie criminal case against the present petitioners. The case of the petitioners is not covered by the guidelines laid down in Bhajan Lal (supra).
8. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court is of the opinion that this is not a fit case for exercising power under Section 482 of the CrPC. Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed. Interim order if there be any, stands vacated. The Criminal Petition is disposed of.
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
