ORDER : This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to quash the proceedings in Crime No.5 of 2022 of Nirmal Town Police Station, Nirmal District, registered for the offences under Sections 498-A and 294-B of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioner herein is accused No.1 in the said Crime. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the Record. With their consent this Criminal Petition is disposed of, at the admission stage. 3. As per the complaint dated 05-01-2022 marriage of the petitioner with 2nd respondent was performed on 31-12-2020. Thereafter the petitioner herein left USA on 09-01-2021. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the 2nd respondent joined him in U.S.A. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 2nd respondent has leveled several allegations against the petitioner herein including the incident in USA. The daughter of the 2nd respondent has not made any complaint to the Police in USA. It is abuse of process of law. The daughter of 2nd respondent is staying with a boyfriend in USA and she is not interested in joining the company of the petitioner herein. However, the petitioner herein has filed an application seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty. Referring to the whasup chat learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 2nd respondent is trying to extract money from the petitioner herein and in the said process she has lodged the present complaint. Thus, there are several factual aspects to be investigated into by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation. The said factual aspects cannot be considered in an application field under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. The punishment prescribed for the offences alleged against the petitioners is below 7 years. 5. In M/s. Neeharika Infrastructure Private Limited v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918 , a Three-judge Bench of the Apex Court laid certain conclusions, for the purpose of exercising powers by High Courts under Section - 482 of Cr.P.C and also Article - 226 of the Constitution of India, which are as under: “…. iv) The power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection, in the ‘rarest of rare cases’. iv) The power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection, in the ‘rarest of rare cases’. (The rarest of rare cases standard in its application for quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not to be confused with the norm which has been formulated in the context of the death penalty, as explained previously by this Court); v) While examining an FIR/complaint, quashing of which is sought, the court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR/complaint; vi) Criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the initial stage; vii) Quashing of a complaint/FIR should be an exception and a rarity than an ordinary rule; viii) Ordinarily, the courts are barred from usurping the jurisdiction of the police, since the two organs of the State operate in two specific spheres of activities. The inherent power of the court is, however, recognised to secure the ends of justice or prevent the above of the process by Section 482 Cr.P.C. ix) The functions of the judiciary and the police are complementary, not overlapping; x) Save in exceptional cases where non-interference would result in miscarriage of justice, the Court and the judicial process should not interfere at the stage of investigation of offences; xi) Extraordinary and inherent powers of the Court do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act according to its whims or caprice; xii) The first information report is not an encyclopedia which must disclose all facts and details relating to the offence reported. Therefore, when the investigation by the police is in progress, the court should not go into the merits of the allegations in the FIR. Police must be permitted to complete the investigation. It would be premature to pronounce the conclusion based on hazy facts that the complaint/FIR does not deserve to be investigated or that it amounts to abuse of process of law. During or after investigation, if the investigating officer finds that there is no substance in the application made by the complainant, the investigating officer may file an appropriate report/summary before the learned Magistrate which may be considered by the learned Magistrate in accordance with the known procedure; xiii) The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is very wide, but conferment of wide power requires the court to be cautious. It casts an onerous and more diligent duty on the court; xiv) However, at the same time, the court, if it thinks fit, regard being had to the parameters of quashing and the self-restraint imposed by law, more particularly the parameters laid down by this Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur (supra) and Bhajan Lal (supra), has the jurisdiction to quash the FIR/complaint; and xv) When a prayer for quashing the FIR is made by the alleged accused, the court when it exercises the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., only has to consider whether or not the allegations in the FIR disclose the commission of a cognizable offence and is not required to consider on merits whether the allegations make out a cognizable offence or not and the court has to permit the investigating agency/police to investigate the allegations in the FIR.” 6. In view of the said principles laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court and in view of the above said discussion, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein in Crime No.05 of 2022 of Nirmal Town Police Station, Nirmal District. However, there are matrimonial disputes between petitioner and daughter of 2nd respondent and the punishment prescribed for the offences alleged against the petitioner herein is below 7 years. 7. Learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that the Investigating Officer has recorded the statements of two witnesses and both of them have specifically stated about the harassment of petitioner. 8. Considering the said facts, this Criminal Petition is disposed of, directing the Investigating Officer in Crime No.5 of 2022 of Nirmal Town Police Station, Nirmal District District, to strictly follow the procedure prescribed in Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. and also the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 . The petitioner shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer by furnishing information and documents as sought by him in concluding the investigation. The petitioner shall also furnish his latest address and E-mail I.D. to the Investigating Officer. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this criminal petition, shall stand closed.