R. K. DASH, J. ( 1 ) IN this petition under Section 482, Cr. P. C. the petitioners seek to quash the FIR and the criminal proceeding initiated against them. ( 2 ) SHORT facts: Smt. Puspanjali Das (hereinafter referred to as 'the victim'), daughter of the informant Prakash Chandra Das, was given in marriage to Bhanu Das, a Computer Engineer who serves in U. S. A. on 22-11-1996. After Marriage, both bride and bridegroom resided for some days in the latter's house at forest park. Dhabanewar and thereafter left for U. S. A. It is alleged, the marital about of the victim being in troubled water, she left U. S. A. and came down to her in-laws' house. After some days, her husband also came, but stayed for a few days and left for U. S. A. The victim while living in in-laws' house was physically and mentally tortured by her parents-in-law as well as husband's older brother, petitioner No. 1 on account of non-fulfilment of demand of huge sum of money as dowry. Complaining of ill-treatment to his daughter at aforesaid, the informant lodged written report in the Capital Police Station, Shubaneswar. On receipt of the said report, P. S. Case No. 595/98 (C. R. Case No. 3887 of 98) under Sections 498a and 323 road with Section 34, IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry prohibition Act was registered and investigation commenced. It transpires from the case diary that during investigation some witnesses, including the informant, victim and others were examined. Referring to their statement as also the FIR petitioners contend the allegation of demand of dowry and consequent ill-treatment are against the parents-in-law and not against them and therefore, the FIR and criminal proceeding should be quashed so far as they are concerned. ( 3 ) I have heard the learned counsel for parties and have gone through the statements of the witnesses available in the case diary. ( 4 ) SHRI S. K. Padhi, learned counsel for petitioners, contends that if the allegations made in the FIR coupled with the statement of the victim are taken into consideration in their fact value, the only offence made out against the petitioner No. 1 is under Section 323. ( 4 ) SHRI S. K. Padhi, learned counsel for petitioners, contends that if the allegations made in the FIR coupled with the statement of the victim are taken into consideration in their fact value, the only offence made out against the petitioner No. 1 is under Section 323. IPC and not under Sections 498a IPC and 8 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and therefore, the FIR and consequent proceeding so far as these offences are concerned should be quashed. ( 5 ) SHRI S. N. Mohanty, learned counsel for the informant, strenuously urges that when the investigation is in progress and further materials are yet to be collected, it is too early to say that there is no prima facie case under Section 498a, IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against petitioner No. 1. He would contend that a reading of victim's statement which of course is not true reproduction of what she stated shows that all the family members except the petitioner No. 2 connived together and ill-treated her both mentally and physically on account of non-fulfilment of demand of dowry. So, it being not a case of no evidence, submits Shri Mohanty, the whole matter should be left to the court below to find the basis of the evidence so to be adduced during trial as to whether petitioner No. 1 is guilty of the offence as all alleged. ( 6 ) LAW is well settled that the High Court has inherent power to reach out injustice and quash the F. I. R. and the Criminal Proceeding, but such powers should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection. The normal procedure of criminal trial cannot be cut short in a casual manner and it is not within the competence of the High Court to embark upon an inquiry as to the reliability and genuineness of the allegation made in the FIR or complaint and the statements of the witnesses acquainted with the facts of the case. The normal procedure of criminal trial cannot be cut short in a casual manner and it is not within the competence of the High Court to embark upon an inquiry as to the reliability and genuineness of the allegation made in the FIR or complaint and the statements of the witnesses acquainted with the facts of the case. As would be the relevant consideration when prayer has been made to quash a proceeding, it is opposite to refer to a decision of the apex Court in the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604 : (1992 Cri LJ 527), where their lordships have catalogued certain categories of cases by way of illustration where the High Court in order to prevent abuse of process of the Court or otherwise to secure ends of justice can exercise power to quash the proceeding. Those categories of cases, as pointed out by the Court by way of illustration are as follows :"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 allegation in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, specifying the FIR do not disclose a cognisable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section its (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 complainant 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 allegation in the FIR do not constitute a cognisable offence but constitute only a non-cognisable 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 allegation made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can over facts a just conclusion that there is against ground for proceeding against the witness. 6. 5. Where the allegation made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can over facts a just conclusion that there is against ground for proceeding against the witness. 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 of the concerned Act, providing officious redress of 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 active for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. " ( 7 ) KEEPING in view the guideline of the apex Court as aforesaid, it is to be seen whether on scrutiny of the FIR and the statements of the witnesses no prima facie case is mad out against the petitioners requiring this Court to quash the FIR and the criminal proceeding in exercise of inherent power under Section 482. Cr. P. C. Sri S. N. Mohanty, learned counsel for the informant, fully concedes that the victim girl has not complained anything against petitioner No. 2 Smt. Bijayalaxmi Deo who has been wrongly arrayed as accused in the FIR But do far is petitioner No. 1 Sanu Das is concerned, he would contend that sufficient materials are available to show that he connived with his presents and brother and ill-treated the victim since demand of huge sum as dowry was not satisfied. To appreciate his contention, 1 have scrutinised the statement of the victim available on record. She has vividly described the alleged ill-treatment rated out to her both at her in-laws' house and in U. S. A. She has alleged that during her short stay in in-laws house, her mother-in-law who expressing that since her father had not given anything he should give at least air-fare to go to him. Not father-in-law was also regularly expressing that if and looks for an American son-in-law, he should at least give to and fro air-fare. She has further stated that she heard her father-in-law within his son over phone to insist on her to get money from her father. Not father-in-law was also regularly expressing that if and looks for an American son-in-law, he should at least give to and fro air-fare. She has further stated that she heard her father-in-law within his son over phone to insist on her to get money from her father. She also alleged that her husband has extra-marital relations with a foreign girl to shown she raised protest. But he did not pay any need to it and on the other hand, assaulted nor for which she left U. S. A. and came back to India. She drived at Calcutta and stayed to some days in her relation's house at Calcutta. Not her parents-in-law knowing that she was coming from U. S. A. did not go to receive her. The then came to Bhubaneswar and stayed in it law' hands and while one was shown. The father-in-law pestered her to get plane-fare and a sum of U. S. Taxes from her father. Her mother-in-law also misbehaved with her expressing that now-a-days a clerk during marriage gets dowry worth lakhs of rupee, whereas her son did not get anything, She has further alleged that one day both petitioner No. 1 and his father tried to snatch away her passport, visa and return air-ticket and when she refused to part with those documents, she was beaten. ( 8 ) ON a reading of the above statement of the victim and knowing in mind the judicial pronouncement or the apex Court referred to above, I am of the view that no offence whatsoever in made out against petitioner No. 2. So far as petitioner No. 1 in conferred there being no allegation of demand of dowry either directly of indirectly, offence under Section 499 A, IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act is not made out against him, However, there is a prima facie case under Section 323, I. C. against him which is a non-cognizable and bailable. Since there are other accused purview, namely, the parents-in-law and the husband of the victim and the offence alleged against them is cognizable, it would be within the competence of the police to proceed with the investigation and if materials are available, it can subject charge-sheet against all the persons, including the petitioner No. 1 against whom, as stated earlier, there is prima facie case under Section 323, IPC. ( 9 ) IN the result, the Criminal Misc. Case is allowed in part. The FIR and the criminal proceeding in no far as petitioner No. 2 - Smt. Bijayalaxmi Das is concerned are quashed. Petition allowed.