Manupatra

Fill in the following details to e-mail

Subject

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> </head> <body> <div style="font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size:12px; text-align:justify"> <table width="800" border="0" style="border:1px solid #ccc;padding:5px;" align="center" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top"> High Court of Bombay In frivolous proceedings, Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from record of the case over and above the averments MANU/MH/3990/2024 - (03 Jul 2024) </td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Jinendra Jagdish Upadhyay and Ors. vs. The State Of Maharashtra and Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024:BHC-AS:26040-DB)</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" style="background-color:#FDEDCE">Petitioners seek quashing of criminal proceedings qua them in Regular Criminal Case pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, arising out of First Information Report ("F.I.R.") registered with the Tarapur Police Station, for the offense punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 and 342 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("I.P.C."). 
In a series of earlier decisions, the Supreme Court has discussed the legal position and provided guidance in matters where vague and general allegations are made against the Accused and a bunch of relatives of the husband are sought to be roped in criminal proceedings. In its decision in the matter of Mahmood Ali v. State of U.P. while considering the principles applicable to the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ("Cr.P.C."), observed that, in frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection try to read in between the lines. The Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. or Article 226 of the Constitution need not restrict itself only to the stage of a case but is empowered to take into account the overall circumstances leading to the initiation/registration of the case as well as the materials collected in the course of investigation. 
There is no allegation against these Petitioners. The F.I.R. therefore appears to have been made against these Petitioners only with a view to harass them and settle some personal grudge. We do find specific allegations against the husband but there are no allegations against the Petitioners No. 1 and 2 and extremely vague allegations against the Petitioners No. 3 and 4. The F.I.R. and the charge- sheet prima-facie do not disclose commission of any offense by these Petitioners. 
The material on record is wholly insufficient to proceed against the Petitioners. Continuing the criminal proceedings against these Petitioners will be an abuse of the process of law.Accordingly, Regular Criminal Case pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate First Classare quashed and set aside.</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" ></td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" >Tags : FIR, Vague allegation, Quashing of</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td> </tr> <tr>  <td align="left" valign="top">Source : newsroom.manupatra.com</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Regards</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Team Manupatra</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td> </tr> </table> </div> </body> </html>