SC: Disciplinary Proceedings Cannot Follow if an Officer is Discharged on the Same Charge  ||  SC Clarified the Distinction Between Arbitration “Seat” And “Venue” While Summarising Key Principles  ||  Supreme Court: Wife and Her Family Cannot Be Prosecuted For Dowry-Giving Based On Her Complaint  ||  SC: Plaint Cannot Be Rejected Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on the Ground of Order II Rule 2 Bar  ||  Supreme Court Has Issued an SOP Prescribing Strict Timelines For Filing Legal Aid Appeals  ||  Madras HC: Dhurandhar 2 Release Cannot be Stalled Due to Objections From a Small Section  ||  Delhi HC: Lokpal May Form Prima Facie Opinion Before Show Cause Notice Without Prior Hearing  ||  Bom HC: Family Courts Cannot Casually Order a Spouse’s Medical Examination to Assess Mental Health  ||  Bombay HC: Child Care Leave Protects Motherhood and Denial Violates Rights of Mother and Child  ||  Supreme Court: Amalgamating Company Loss Cannot be Set Off Against Amalgamated Income    

Jinendra Jagdish Upadhyay and Ors. vs. The State Of Maharashtra and Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024:BHC-AS:26040-DB) - (High Court of Bombay) (03 Jul 2024)

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

Criminal

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.

Tags : FIR   VAGUE ALLEGATION   QUASHING OF  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved