Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1355 (ALL)

Sakthu v. State of U. P.

2017-05-22

AJAI LAMBA, VIJAY LAKSHMI

body2017
JUDGMENT 1. This petition seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing First Information Report, lodged as Case Crime No. 153 of 2017 under Sections 498A, 302 I.P.C., P.S. Bighapur, district Unnao. 2. We have carefully gone through the contents of the impugned First Information Report. 3. The First Information Report has been registered while employing the provisions of Section 156(3) CrPC. Allegedly, daughter of the complainant was married on 1.5.2004 with Binda Prasad son of Sakthu. There was a demand for dowry and harassment on account of not bringing dowry. Allegedly, the deceased has been done to death by way of pouring kerosene oil and putting her on fire. 4. Short contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased. The petitioners had a separate residence. When the petitioners heard the victim crying on account of pain, the petitioners rushed to the spot to save the victim. In the process, petitioner No. 1 received serious burn injuries on account of which the petitioner was admitted to Uma Shanker Dixit Distt. Hospital, Unnao from 1.8.2016 to 22.8.2016. Discharge slip has been placed on record as Annexure-5. On the strength of this argument, it has been pleaded that the petitioners cannot possibly have committed the offence, if they rushed to the spot to save the victim and shifted her to hospital. 5. We have considered the contention of learned counsel. 6. There is a direct allegation of pouring kerosene oil and putting fire to the victim. At this juncture, a conclusion cannot be drawn that the petitioners are not involved in committing the offence. 7. Evidence cannot be taken by way of affidavits and counter affidavits to record a finding that the ingredients of the alleged offence are not satisfied. No such material has been placed on record that can be translated into legal evidence so as to disprove the prosecution case. 8. We have considered the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners, in context of the material/pleadings relied on by the petitioners, in context of judgment rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Rajiv Thappar and others v. Madan Lal Kapoor (2013) 3 SCC 330 . In Rajiv Thappar’s case (supra), the following (relevant portion) has been held “29. 8. We have considered the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners, in context of the material/pleadings relied on by the petitioners, in context of judgment rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Rajiv Thappar and others v. Madan Lal Kapoor (2013) 3 SCC 330 . In Rajiv Thappar’s case (supra), the following (relevant portion) has been held “29. The issue being examined in the instant case is the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., if it chooses to quash the initiation of the prosecution against an accused, at the stage of issuing process, or at the stage of committal, or even at the stage of framing of charges. These are all stages before the commencement of the actual trial. The same parameters would naturally be available for later stages as well. The power vested in the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., at the stages referred to hereinabove, would have far reaching consequences, inasmuch as, it would negate the prosecution’s/complainant’s case without allowing the prosecution/complainant to lead evidence. Such a determination must always be rendered with caution, care and circumspection. To invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. the High Court has to be fully satisfied, that the material produced by the accused is such, that would lead to the conclusion, that his/their defence is based on sound, reasonable, and indubitable facts; the material produced is such, as would rule out and displace the assertions contained in the charges levelled against the accused; and the material produced is such, as would clearly reject and overrule the veracity of the allegations contained in the accusations levelled by the prosecution/complainant. It should be sufficient to rule out, reject and discard the accusations levelled by the prosecution/complainant, without the necessity of recording any evidence. For this the material relied upon by the defence should not have been refuted, or alternatively, cannot be justifiably refuted, being material of sterling and impeccable quality. The material relied upon by the accused should be such, as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the actual basis of the accusations as false. For this the material relied upon by the defence should not have been refuted, or alternatively, cannot be justifiably refuted, being material of sterling and impeccable quality. The material relied upon by the accused should be such, as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the actual basis of the accusations as false. In such a situation, the judicial conscience of the High Court would persuade it to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash such criminal proceedings, for that would prevent abuse of process of the court, and secure the ends of justice. 30. Based on the factors canvassed in the foregoing paragraphs, we would delineate the following steps to determine the veracity of a prayer for quashing, raised by an accused by invoking the power vested in the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.: 30.1. Step one, whether the material relied upon by the accused is sound, reasonable, and indubitable, i.e., the material is of sterling and impeccable quality? 30.2. Step two, whether the material relied upon by the accused, would rule out the assertions contained in the charges levelled against the accused, i.e., the material is sufficient to reject and overrule the factual assertions contained in the complaint, i.e., the material is such, as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the factual basis of the accusations as false? 30.3. Step three, whether the material relied upon by the accused, has not been refuted by the prosecution/complainant; and/or the material is such, that it cannot be justifiably refuted by the prosecution/complainant? 30.4. Step four, whether proceeding with the trial would result in an abuse of process of the court, and would not serve the ends of justice? (Emphasised by us) 30.5. If the answer to all the steps is in the affirmative, judicial conscience of the High Court should persuade it to quash such criminal proceedings, in exercise of power vested in it under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Such exercise of power, besides doing justice to the accused, would save precious court time, which would otherwise be wasted in holding such a trial (as well as, proceedings arising therefrom) specially when, it is clear that the same would not conclude in the conviction of the accused.” 9. We are of the considered opinion that the material/pleadings on which learned counsel for the petitioners has relied, is not such as would rule out and displace the assertions contained in the charges/allegations levelled against the accused; and the material produced is not of sterling and impeccable quality as would persuade reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the actual basis of the accusation as false. 10. Under the circumstances, we find no ground to interfere in extraordinary writ jurisdiction. 11. The petition is dismissed. 12. Before parting with the order, however, having regard to the contents of Annexure-5, the discharge slip of petitioner No. 1, we direct the investigating officer to investigate at the first instance whether the petitioners were, in fact, involved in committing the offence, or have been implicated only because they happened to be father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased.