The Division Bench of the Supreme Court consisting of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, while hearing an appeal, opined that since there was no material placed on record by the complainant to justify the bald allegations, it will be nothing but a clear abuse of the process of law if criminal proceedings were initiated based on it.
Facts
The appellant was married when she was a minor to Shiv Gobind Prajapati with whom she never stayed, and the marriage was never consummated. This marriage was dissolved through Village Panchayat. The appellant while doing her studies, met Mohd. Shameem Khan and they got married. A certificate of marriage was issued by the competent authority. From this marriage, the appellant gave birth to a male child. Unfortunately, her husband passed away. The appellant got employment as Auxiliary Nurse Midwife (A.N.M.) on compassionate grounds and being the legally wedded wife of the deceased (late Mohd. Shameed Khan), his terminal dues were paid to her. The entire gratuity amount of her late husband was transferred by her to the bank account of her mother-in-law. However, she was thrown out of her matrimonial home by her brother-in-law (respondent no.2) with an eleven-month-old child and thereafter respondent no.2 made all kinds of false and frivolous allegations against the appellant, including to the employer of the appellant to remove her from employment.
Procedural History
A written complaint/FIR was registered against the appellant by respondent no.2 for offences u/s 494, 495, 416, 420, 504 & 506 IPC. It was alleged that the appellant had entered into marriage with late Mohd. Shameem Khan and she started to harass his late brother mentally and physically due to which his brother suddenly died. Immediately after his death, the appellant tried to oust her in-laws from the house. She obtained the job by committing a forgery on compassionate grounds and took all the terminal benefits and the genuine dependents of her late husband were deprived of his terminal benefits and this Nikah (marriage) was solemnized by her without any divorce from her previous husband.
Read also : SC: Compensation is to be determined keeping in view the future prospects [Motor Vehicle Accidents]
Anticipatory bail was granted to the appellant and after chargesheet came to be filed u/s 494, 420, 504, 506, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, the learned trial Judge took cognizance of the same and summoned the appellant. The appellant approached the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad u/s 482 CrPC for quashing of the proceedings, but that came to be dismissed by the High Court, which is the subject matter of challenge in this appeal.
Contentions Made
Appellant: There is no iota of evidence to support what is alleged in the complaint by respondent no.2 based on which FIR has been registered and even if what is being stated in the FIR is taken on its face value, prima facie, none of the offences which have been levelled against the appellant in the chargesheet are made out.
Respondent: After the FIR was registered, investigation was made and only thereafter the chargesheet was filed. It can at least be presumed that a prima facie case against her is made out. The High Court has appreciated the material available on record and found no reason to interfere in its inherent jurisdiction u/s 482 CrPC and the impugned judgment needs no further interference of this Court.
Observations of the Court
The Bench observed that:
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 CrPC.”
Judgment
The criminal proceedings initiated against the appellant u/s 494, 495, 416, 420, 504 & 506 IPC were quashed and set aside.
Case Name: Shafiya Khan @ Shakuntala Prajapati vs State of U.P. & Anr.
Citation: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 200 OF 2022
Bench: Justice Ajay Rastogi, Justice Abhay S. Oka
Decided on:10th February 2022
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure
0 Comments