2022 (2) TMI 1432 - SC - Indian Laws

Declining to interfere in the criminal proceedings initiated against the Appellant at the instance of Respondent No. 2/complainant (bother-in-law of the Appellant) - forged marriage or not - HELD THAT - The exposition of law on the subject relating to the exercise of the extra-ordinary power Under Article 226 of the Constitution or the inherent power Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure are well settled and to the possible extent this Court has defined sufficiently channelized guidelines to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. It is no doubt true that the power of quashing of criminal proceedings should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in rarest of the rare cases and it was not justified for the Court in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and that the inherent powers do not confer any arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act according to its whims and fancies. Adverting to the facts of the instant case there was no material placed on record by the complainant to justify the bald allegations which were made in the complaint on the basis of which FIR was registered. There are undisputed facts on record that the Appellant s marriage was solemnized with late Mohd. Shameem Khan on 11th December 2016 and from this wed-lock a male child was born on 23rd September 2017 and her husband untimely passed away on 8th December 2017 and until their period of matrimonial relationship no complaint of any kind was ever made by her late husband (Mohd. Shameem Khan) and after she was paid his terminal benefits and got a compassionate appointment in his place as an A.N.M. by an order dated 19th May 2018 w.e.f. 28th April 2018 all sort of issues were raised by the complainant (brother of her deceased husband) of making such false allegations with reference to her marriage and also for the terminal benefits which she received and there was not even prima facie foundation to support the nature of allegations which were made. In the given circumstances and going through the complaint on the basis of which FIR was registered and other material placed on record we are of the considered view that no offence of any kind as has been alleged in the FIR has been made out against the Appellant and if we allow the criminal proceedings to continue it will be nothing but a clear abuse of the process of law and will be a mental trauma to the Appellant which has been completely overlooked by the High Court while dismissing the petition filed at her instance Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure. The criminal proceedings initiated against the Appellant in reference to FIR No. 0227 of 2019 dated 9th July 2019 Under Sections 494 495 416 420 504 506 Indian Penal Code lodged at PS Bazar Khala District Lucknow U.P. are hereby quashed and set aside - appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Criminal proceedings quashing under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure.

Analysis:
The judgment revolves around the criminal proceedings initiated against the Appellant based on a complaint filed by the brother-in-law of the Appellant. The Appellant's case involves complex marital issues, including her marriage to Shiv Gobind Prajapati, subsequent annulment, and her marriage to Mohd. Shameem Khan under Sharia law. The complaint alleged various offenses under the Indian Penal Code, leading to the filing of a charge-sheet and summoning of the Appellant. The Appellant approached the High Court seeking quashing of the proceedings, which was declined, prompting the appeal before the Supreme Court.

The Appellant's counsel argued that the allegations were baseless and aimed at pressuring her to hand over terminal benefits received after her late husband's demise. It was contended that the criminal proceedings were an abuse of process and causing mental harassment. The State and complainant's counsel argued that a prima facie case existed, justifying the continuation of the proceedings. The Supreme Court examined the principles laid down in previous judgments regarding the exercise of extraordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The Supreme Court analyzed the facts of the case, emphasizing the lack of material to support the allegations made in the complaint. It noted the absence of factual supporting material for the allegations and highlighted that the charge-sheet did not establish how the marriage certificate was forged. The Court concluded that no offense as alleged in the FIR was made out against the Appellant. It was determined that allowing the proceedings to continue would amount to an abuse of process and cause mental trauma to the Appellant. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashing the criminal proceedings initiated against the Appellant under the specified sections of the Indian Penal Code.

In summary, the judgment delves into the intricacies of the Appellant's marital history, the allegations made in the complaint, the legal principles governing the quashing of criminal proceedings, and the lack of factual basis to support the charges against the Appellant. The Supreme Court's decision to quash the proceedings was based on the absence of material substantiating the allegations and the potential for the continuation of the proceedings to result in an abuse of the legal process and mental trauma to the Appellant.