( 1 ) THE petitioner, M. P. Lohia alias Mahavir Prasad Lohia, by filing an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, sought for quashing of the proceeding arising out of Karaya P. S. Case No. 314 dated 28. 10. 2003 under Sections 498a/406/304b/34 of the Indian Penal code and also the charge-sheet No. 98/2005 dated 6. 9. 2005 under Sections 498a/406/304b/34 of the Indian Penal Code. ( 2 ) THE backdrop of the present case may briefly be stated as follows : -On the basis of the recorded statement of the de facto complainant, jogendra Agarwal, Karaya P. S. Case No. 314 dated 28. 10. 2003 was started. In statement before the police, he introduced himself as a businessman. The victim, Chandni Agarwal, since deceased, was his daughter. She did her graduation in commerce with Honours in 2002 and obtained scholarship from University of Kolkata. After her graduation, her father started negotiation for her marriage. On 18. 2. 2002, she got married to Gourav Agarwal and such marriage was duly solemnized according to Hindu rites and customs. There had been demand of dowry at the time of marriage. The father of the victim had to pay Rs. 1,50,000/- in cash and gold ornaments of various descriptions as well as other furniture and valuable articles. Soon after marriage, the husband of the victim as well as his parents and grandfather started demanding more dowries. This was when the victim was at her matrimonial home at Ludhiana. The husband of the victim demanded a private car and when Chandni tried to avoid such demands of dowry, she used to be subjected to mental and physical torture. ( 3 ) THE de facto complainant alleged that he used to receive telephone call from his daughter, who used to narrate the acts of torture on her. He accordingly requested his son-in-law and his parents to send chandni back to Kolkata. Chandni came to Kolkata in May, 2002. Her husband and the in-laws refused to take her back. ( 4 ) AFTER about 90 days, they compelled him to furnish a written declaration mentioned therein that there had never been any torture upon chandni nor any demand of dowry. Keeping in mind the future of his daughter, he gave such a declaration and thereafter Chandni was taken back to Ludhiana. ( 4 ) AFTER about 90 days, they compelled him to furnish a written declaration mentioned therein that there had never been any torture upon chandni nor any demand of dowry. Keeping in mind the future of his daughter, he gave such a declaration and thereafter Chandni was taken back to Ludhiana. Within a few days, she was again subjected to such mental and physical torture-without any rhyme and reason. Gourav directed her to bring a private car from her father. ( 5 ) BEING unable to bear with such torture, the victim again left her matrimonial home on 13th September, 2003 leaving all her personal belonging and valuable articles behind. Before returning to her parental home in Kolkata, Chandni used to narrate the various acts of torture over telephone. ( 6 ) FOR tactical reasons, neither Chandni nor her parents took any action at that stage. The de facto complainant went to Ludhiana on 12. 9. 2003 and met her daughter there. Finding her in a disastrous condition, he took her to a doctor, who diagnosed her as a victim of severe mental and physical torture. The doctor further opined that she was suffering from trauma and mental depression. ( 7 ) THE de facto complainant naturally took his daughter along with her back to Kolkata where necessary arrangements were made for treatment. Even at that stage, Chandni used to be threatened over telephone by her husband, Gourav as well as members of the family, namely, Anil agarwal, Uma Devi Agarwal and M. P. Lohia. ( 8 ) IN such painful circumstances, the victim committed suicide on 28. 102003. ( 9 ) ON the basis of such recorded statement of Jogendra Agarwal, karaya P. S Case No. 314 dated 28. 10. 2003 under sections 498a/406/304b/34 of the Indian Penal Code was started. After completion of investigation police authority submitted charge-sheet in the said case. ( 10 ) IT had been alleged by the present petitioner that continuation of the said criminal proceeding would be an abuse of the process of Court. In this context, the petitioner claimed that he is a renowned and reputed businessman having a very respectable and successful family of his own. ( 11 ) THE petitioner claimed that the marriage between Chandni and gourav was solemnized on 18. 2. 2002. The couple thereafter started residing in Ludhiana. In this context, the petitioner claimed that he is a renowned and reputed businessman having a very respectable and successful family of his own. ( 11 ) THE petitioner claimed that the marriage between Chandni and gourav was solemnized on 18. 2. 2002. The couple thereafter started residing in Ludhiana. The marriage could not consummate due to indifferent behaviour of the bride/chandni. Chandni was all along a patient of mental depression. On 5. 7. 2002, her parents went to Ludhinia and told about the behavioural problem of their daughter, Chandni. Thereafter, she was taken to renowned psychiatrist of Ludhinia and was under his treatment. On being insisted by her father, she was brought to one Dr. Rima Mukherjee in Kolkata. ( 12 ) ON 27. 7. 2002, the husband of the victim received a scanned e-mail letter from his father-in-law intimating him that Chandni tried to commit suicide and the copy of the suicide note was also sent. ( 13 ) THE husband of the deceased became apprehensive and started recording each and every word of communication with his in-laws till the last conversation they had on 28. 9. 2003 i. e. one month prior to the date deceased committed suicide. ( 14 ) THE prescription regarding the treatment as directed by Dr. Rima mukherjee and Dr. Smita Singh were also E-mailed to the husband of the deceased. Husband of the deceased received E-mail as well as a letter dated 19. 8 2002 from his father-in-law whereby he was informed that the doctors have called both husband and wife for 'marriage Therapy'. In view of overdose of medicines taken over long period, Chandni developed certain other health as well as psychological problems. ( 15 ) ON extensive inquiry, it could be learnt that the victim was suffering from Schizophrenia and such overdose of medicines for a protracted period of time could also develop suicidal tendency. During Ist week of February, 2003, Chandni and her husband were in Mumbai to attend the wedding of the cousin of the deceased. After the wedding, Chandni was again brought back to Kolkata by her parents on the pretext of her medical treatment. ( 16 ) ON 17. 2. 2003, the victim sent an E-mail to her father-in-law and mother-in-law. In it she expressed that she was missing their company and was eager to be back to her matrimonial home. After the wedding, Chandni was again brought back to Kolkata by her parents on the pretext of her medical treatment. ( 16 ) ON 17. 2. 2003, the victim sent an E-mail to her father-in-law and mother-in-law. In it she expressed that she was missing their company and was eager to be back to her matrimonial home. Vasu, brother of Chandni, sent a letter which was received by Gourav on 6. 3. 2003. He was, thus, informed by such letter that there had been a complete personality change of the victim. ( 17 ) THE de facto complainant gave a letter to his son-in-law which was received on 2. 4. 2004. Praises were showered in the said letter for his son-in-law and his family members. During the 2nd week of May, 2003, chandni along with her parent went to Ludhinia and stayed at her maternal uncle's place. On 8th June, 2003, her husband and maternal grandfather, being the petitioner herein, met her in a restaurant. During conversation, she expressed her passionate desire to return to her husband's place. ( 18 ) FROM 8/6/2003 onward, Chandni stayed at Ludhinia with her husband and in-laws. Her pre-marital affair continued to bother her, as the partner used to send her E-mails and telephone SMS. This resulted in deterioration of the health of Chandni after 23rd August, 2003. As per advice of Dr. Rima Mukherjee, Chandni started taking the medicines. She was taken to Shimla by her husband. On 7/9/2003, the cousin of Chandni took her along with him, as the grandmother of Chandni wanted to see her. ( 19 ) REPEATED attempts on the part of Gourav to meet his wife failed. ( 20 ) ON 13. 9. 2003, after strenuous efforts and despite resistance of his father-in-law, the husband could at fast talk to his wife/chandni over mobile phone. She was requested not to back to Kolkata. Being scared of such development, the father-in-law of the deceased filed an application with the S. H. O. Police Chowki No. 8, Ludhiana highlighting the factum of taking away of the daughter-in-law by her father. ( 21 ) ON 8. 10. 2003, Smt. Uma, as mother-in-law of the victim, sent her a cheque of Rs. 500/- on the occasion of Karwa Chauth. ( 22 ) UNFORTUNATELY, Chandni committed suicide on 28. 10. 2003. ( 23 ) IN this application under Section 482 of Cr. ( 21 ) ON 8. 10. 2003, Smt. Uma, as mother-in-law of the victim, sent her a cheque of Rs. 500/- on the occasion of Karwa Chauth. ( 22 ) UNFORTUNATELY, Chandni committed suicide on 28. 10. 2003. ( 23 ) IN this application under Section 482 of Cr. P. C. , the petitioner further claimed that Chandni had a bright educational background. But she was a patient of Schizophrenia and multiple depression. ( 24 ) THE petitioner claimed that the allegations made in the F. I. R. are false and hollow. Referring to copies of certain photographs of victim along with her husband as well as members of his family, it was contended that there had been best of relation The present petition was granted anticipatory bail by order dated 4/2/2005 passed by the Apex Court. It is alleged that the victim while leaving her matrimonial home on 7/9/2003 took away most of the articles. ( 25 ) BY order dated 29/3/2004, the Hon'ble Supreme Court granted an order of stay of arrest of the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased. Petitioner in every possible manner wanted to cooperate with the investigation. ( 26 ) DUE to acute health problem, the petitioner was in B. M. Birla heart Research Centre for treatment. ( 27 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner, there had been an unnecessary mala fide attempt on the part of the de facto complainant to harass the petitione and another accused persons in this case unnecessarily. The petitioner further claimed that after completion of investigation, police authority submitted charge-sheet in this case under Sections 498a/406/304b/34 of indian Penal Code. The case was subsequently committed with the Court of Sessions. It now stands renumbered as S. C. No. 32 (4)/04. The said case had then been transferred to the learned 9th Court of Additional Sessions judge, Alipore for disposal. The petitioner alleged that the impugned charge-sheet is a product of ineffective and indolent investigation and none of the documents, which were placed by the petitioner through his learned Counsel, could bring any change. ( 28 ) MR. Sekhar Basu, as learned Counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, stated about the ailment, 'schizophrenia' and how the victim was suffering from the same. He contended that suicide is practically a leading cause of mortality. ( 28 ) MR. Sekhar Basu, as learned Counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, stated about the ailment, 'schizophrenia' and how the victim was suffering from the same. He contended that suicide is practically a leading cause of mortality. On behalf of the petitioner, it was submitted that criminal prosecution ought not to be permitted to degenerate into an instrument of harassment and oppression. In absence of any iota of material in support of the claim that the petitioner had anything to do with the alleged. torture upon the victim, there could be very little justification for allowing the case to continue against him. The petitioner claimed that he is a septuagenarian and at the twilight of his life, he has been unnecessarily tied up as an accused in this case. ( 29 ) MR. Basu contended that there can be no material to show that soon before the death of the victim, she was subjected to any harassment or cruelty by the petitioner for or in connection with any demand of dowry. The petitioner, in such circumstances, approached this Court with an application under Section 482 of Cr. P. C. praying for quashing of the proceedings. ( 30 ) MR. Basu, in course of his submission, did not miss to mention that the present petitioner is an old man of 74 years having various ailments. According to Mr. Basu, there had been extremely pleasant relationship between the family of the victim and that of her husband. The victim was well taken care of. She, for about 51 days prior to her commission of suicide, was residing at her parents' house and as such there could be no basis for implicating the petitioner and others in this case. It was contended that even in the purported suicide note, the victim showered her husband and members of his family with love, affection. ( 31 ) LEARNED Counsel, Mr. Basu further submitted that the investigation was conducted in a biased, tainted and a prejudicial manner. ( 32 ) REFERRING to the decision in the case of Kans Raj v. State of punjab and Ors. reported in AIR 2000 SC 2324 , it was submitted by Mr. Basu that "in cases where such accusations are made, the covert acts attributed to persons other than husband are required to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. ( 32 ) REFERRING to the decision in the case of Kans Raj v. State of punjab and Ors. reported in AIR 2000 SC 2324 , it was submitted by Mr. Basu that "in cases where such accusations are made, the covert acts attributed to persons other than husband are required to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. ( 33 ) IT was then submitted that uncontroverted allegations in the impugned charge-sheet and its accompanying documents do not show that the petitioner was ever in the matrimonial home of the victim or at her parental residence. The allegation implicating him is thus patently absurd and inherently improbable. There is no allegation of any entrustment of property in the hands of the petitioner The petitioner, in such circumstances, sought for quashing of the proceeding. ( 34 ) ON the other hand, the opposite party No. 2/de facto complainant filed an Affidavit-in-Opposition thereby denying all the material allegations made by the petitioner and also disputed the claims made by and on behalf of the petitioner. It was submitted that there could be no scope for this court to enter into the detailed factual aspects at this stage. ( 35 ) THE present application for quashing of the instant criminal proceeding was challenged by Mr. Mallick, as learned Counsel for the opposite party/state. ( 36 ) ACCORDING to learned Counsel, Mr. Sekhar Basu, appearing for the present petitioner, the allegations made in the F. I. R. are so patently absurd and intrinsically hollow that the same do not deserve any consideration whatsoever. It was submitted that the present petitioner is an old respectable successful man, who had been unnecessarily and unreasonably implicated in the case and this was done with an ulterior motive. ( 37 ) REFERENCE was made to the fact that such petitioner was favoured with an order of bail. The address given in the F. I. R. contradicts that indicated in the charge-sheet. It was categorically mentioned that the F. I. R. and other materials sought to have been relied upon by the prosecution suffer from inherent improbability. The petitioner could not have had anything to do with the allegations. ( 38 ) IT was contended that the petitioner wanted to co-operate with the investigating authority and sought to assist it in exploring the truth. But such efforts on the part of the petitioner did not receive any positive response. The petitioner could not have had anything to do with the allegations. ( 38 ) IT was contended that the petitioner wanted to co-operate with the investigating authority and sought to assist it in exploring the truth. But such efforts on the part of the petitioner did not receive any positive response. Referring to the copy of the letter dated 23rd March, 2004 addressed to the Officer-in-Charge of Karaya police station. It was submitted that the documents as referred to in the said letter were not even looked into. It was then submitted that the charge-sheet is a result of biased investigation. In response to this, Mr, Mallick, as learned Counsel for the opposite party/state submitted that the victim died within 7 years of her marriage. He invited attention of the Court to the ingredients of section 304b of the Indian Penal Code as also Section 113b of the Indian Evidence Act. ( 39 ) MR. Mallick contended that it is not the right stage for making any attempt to segregate the petitioner from other accused persons. It was quite rightly mentioned that there is no scope for placing reliance upon the various documents and materials which have been referred to or annexed to the application under Section 482 of Cr. P. C. ( 40 ) MR. Mallick invited attention of the Court to the order of the Apex court wherein it was observed that 'correctness or genuineness of the document can only be gone into in a full-fledged trial and it will not be safe to place reliance on any one of these documents at this stage. ' ( 41 ) IT was observed that 'therefore, we would venture not to comment on the genuineness of these documents at this stage. Suffice it to say that this is a matter to be considered at the trial. ' ( 42 ) ON the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the opposite party/de facto complainant, at the very outset, submitted that law does not permit any manner of interference at this stage. Law must be permitted to take its own course and, as submitted on behalf of the private opposite party. Section 482 of the Cr. P. C cannot be applied so as to frustrate the process of law. ( 43 ) TRUE, there are occasions when this Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of Cr. Law must be permitted to take its own course and, as submitted on behalf of the private opposite party. Section 482 of the Cr. P. C cannot be applied so as to frustrate the process of law. ( 43 ) TRUE, there are occasions when this Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of Cr. P. C. can direct quashing of investigation even at the nascent stage or can quash a criminal proceeding after submission of charge-sheet But it all depends upon the particular fact and circumstances of the case. ( 44 ) THIS Court can very well pass an order in exercise of its power under Section 482 of Cr. P. C. in order to secure the ends of justice when there is no provision nor any prohibition in the Code. ( 45 ) ATTENTION of the Court was invited to the observation made by the Apex Court in the case of State of Orissa v. Debendra Nath Padhi reported in (2005) 1 SCC 568 : (2005)1 C Cr LR (SC) 487. The same may be reproduced as follows : - 'regarding the argument of the accused having to face the trial despite being in a position to produce material of unimpeachable character of sterling quality, the width of the powers of the High Court under section 482 of the Code and Article 226 of the Constitution is unlimited whereunder in the interests of justice the High Court can make such orders as may be necessary to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice within the parameters laid down in Bhajan Lal case. ' ( 46 ) IT was also submitted that if the Court finds that there is lacuna in the investigation and no serious effort was made by the police to find out the truth of facts relevant to the case, the Court can very well direct further investigation. Reference was made to the decision in the case of Dr. (Smt.)Sulekha Mishra v. Purushottam Lal Sharma and Ors. reported in (2006)1 m. P. H. R. 195. ( 47 ) ON the other hand, relying upon the decision in the case of State of Orissa and Anr. v, Saroj Kumar Sahoo reported in (2005) 13 SCC 540 , it was submitted on behalf of the private opposite party that inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr. reported in (2006)1 m. P. H. R. 195. ( 47 ) ON the other hand, relying upon the decision in the case of State of Orissa and Anr. v, Saroj Kumar Sahoo reported in (2005) 13 SCC 540 , it was submitted on behalf of the private opposite party that inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr. P. C. though wide, has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution and only when such exercise is justified by the tests specifically laid down in the section itself. ( 48 ) THE Apex Court observed that such inherent power is to be exercised ex debito justitiae to do real and substantial justice for the administration of which alone the Courts exist. In exercise of the power the court would be justified in quashing 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. ( 49 ) IT is a fact that there can be no hard and fast rule as regards cases in which such power can be exercised in order to quash a proceeding. In the case of R. P. Kapur v. State of Punjab reported in 1960 cr LJ 1239, the Apex Court summarized some categories of cases where inherent power need be exercised to quash the proceedings. (i) Where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance e. g. want of sanction ; (ii) Where the allegations in the first information report or complaint taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute the offence alleged ; (iii) Where the allegations constitute an offence, but there is no legal evidence adduced or the evidence adduced clearly or manifestly fails to prove the charge. ( 50 ) IN the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal as reported in AIR 1992 SC 604 , the Apex Court dealt with the scope of exercise of power under Section 482, Cr. P. C and the categories of cases where the High court may exercise its power under it relating to cognizable offences to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. P. C and the categories of cases where the High court may exercise its power under it relating to cognizable offences to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. ( 51 ) THE guidelines 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 allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F. I. R. 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 F. I. R. or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and made out a case against the accused. (4) Where the allegations in the F. I. R. 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 F. I. R. 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 Act concerned (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 Act concerned, 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) 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. " ( 52 ) IN the present case, the present petitioner had also been directly implicated in the recorded statement of the de facto complainant which was treated as F. I. R. It is neither possible nor desirable for this Court to even attempt to measure the materials which transpired in course of investigation with a coffee spoon at this stage. This Court cannot embark upon an inquiry and make a thorough probe as to the genuineness of the materials collected in course of investigation. The fact remains that the victim brought her life to a tragic end and this was done within a period of seven years of her marriage. ( 53 ) IT will certainly be not desirable to read much into the allegation that such victim was a patient of Schizophrenia. ( 54 ) THERE are consistent statements of the de facto complainant recorded subsequently which go a long way substantiate that there had practically been uninterrupted demands of more and more dowry. How far the daughter of the de facto complainant was a victim of such undue pressure inflicted on her cannot also be decided now. It could very well be that there had been some manifestations of a psychosomatic disorder. ( 55 ) THE present petitioner's name finds mention in a number of statements recorded under Section 161 of Cr. P. C. Thus, irrespective of his actual place of residence and independent of his success in life and reputation in society, it is difficult for this Court to allow him to wash his hands of. There is no such material inspiring confidence of the Court so as to hold that the petitioner is an unfortunate victim of circumstances and that it will be a mere wild goose chase if the present criminal case is allowed to continue against him. ( 56 ) AFTER giving due regard to all the facts and circumstances and having regard to the submission made by the learned Counsel for the parties, this Court is inclined to hold that there is nothing to conclude that the allegations made against the present petitioner in this case are inherently absurd. ( 56 ) AFTER giving due regard to all the facts and circumstances and having regard to the submission made by the learned Counsel for the parties, this Court is inclined to hold that there is nothing to conclude that the allegations made against the present petitioner in this case are inherently absurd. ( 57 ) CONSIDERING all these aspects, I find it difficult to appreciate the grievances ventilated on behalf of the present petitioner. In the considered opinion of this Court, interest of justice demands that the criminal proceeding under reference must be allowed to proceed. Accordingly the present application being C. R. R. 2894 of 2006 be dismissed.