498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023 – Allahabad High Court – No Specific Act defined In Complaint, The Order against the In-laws Quashed.
498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023- In this article, the Allahabad High Court held that the wife has leveled general allegations in the FIR without allegations of any specific act against the In-laws, and in the impugned summoning order passed by the magistrate, there is nothing which may indicate that the Magistrate has considered the facts of the case before passing the summoning order against the In-laws, the order clearly lacks application of reflection of judicial mind or discretion. The magistrate has not conducted any inquiry to satisfy himself that the allegations made in the complaint constitute an offense against the In-laws, and the order passed by the Magistrate is cryptic, and it does not stand the test laid down by the court. Therefore, the entire criminal proceedings against the In-laws are hereby quashed.
Case Brief- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023
According to the facts of this case, the wife has filed a complaint at the police station for the offense punishable under Sections 498A, 323 of IPC read with Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the In-laws.
Later, an FIR and a case were registered against the In-laws, and the Magistrate, Allahabad passed a summoning order dated 16.08.2022 against the In-laws, and the case is now pending in the court of Magistrate, Allahabad.
Upon this, the In-laws have filed the present application under Section 482 of CrPC to quash the summoning order dated 16.08.2022 passed by the Magistrate as well as the entire proceedings against them.
_________________________________________________
Arguments- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023
The advocate appearing on behalf of the In-laws submitted that the summoning order dated 16.08.2022 in the present application is wholly arbitrary and is liable to be set aside by the court.
It is also submitted that the Magistrate has simply recorded a conclusion that on the basis of the complaint filed by the wife, the statements of the wife, and the statements of her witnesses, a prima facie offense under Sections 498A, 323 of IPC and Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act appears to have been committed by the In-laws.
It is further submitted that the conclusion recorded by the Magistrate is not preceded by any discussion about the allegations made in the complaint by the wife or the statements of the wife and her witnesses, recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC.
Arguments- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023
It is also submitted that in the absence of any finding recorded by the Magistrate, on the basis of the allegations made in the complaint filed by the wife, the statement of the wife, and that of her witnesses, no prima facie satisfaction was recorded by the Magistrate for summoning the In-laws under Sections 498A, 323 of IPC and Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Furthermore, it is submitted that the In-laws have been summoned by the Magistrate without any inquiry, and no findings have been recorded by the Magistrate regarding the manner of the alleged dowry demand, the quantum of the alleged dowry demand against the In-laws.
It is also submitted that the Magistrate has not considered the allegations made in the complaint by the wife regarding the commission of an offense under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and no material particulars regarding the same have been mentioned in the summoning order dated 16.08.2022 by the Magistrate, and the impugned summoning order is wholly arbitrary.
Therefore, he prayed for quashing the summoning order dated 16.08.2022 passed by the Magistrate and the entire proceedings against the In-laws.
_________________________________________________
_____________________________________
Referred Judgements- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023
- Mahboob and Others Vs. State of U.P. and another
- Priyanka Srivastava and another Vs. State of U.P. and another
- Smt. Shiv Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P. and another
- Hariram Verma and four others Vs. State of U.P. and another
- M/s. Pepsi Food Ltd. & another Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate & Others
- S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Neeta Bhalla
- Anita Malhotra Vs. Apparel Export Promotion Council
Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023
It is stated by the court that every inquiry other than a trial which is conducted by the Magistrate or the court is an inquiry, and no specific manner or mode of the Inquiry is provided under Section 202 of CrPC, and the inquiry is done by the Magistrate for the purpose of deciding whether there is sufficient ground for the proceedings against the accused person or not.
It is also stated by the court that the Magistrate should at least mention in the summoning order about the prima facie satisfaction for summoning the In-laws, and the order passed by the Magistrate must reflect that he has exercised his jurisdiction in accordance with the law after satisfying himself about the prima facie allegations made by the wife in the complaint.
It is further stated that summoning an accused person to appear before the criminal court is a serious matter, and it affects the self-respect, dignity, and image of the accused in society, and this process of the criminal court should not be made a weapon of harassment, and the Magistrate cannot summon an accused person mechanically simply by writing that the statements of the person who filed the complaint and his witnesses are perused under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023
The court by referring to one of the above-mentioned cases also stated that at the stage of summoning an accused person, the Magistrate is not required to evaluate or examine the pieces of evidence, and he is not required to record the detailed reasons for summoning the said person, a brief order which can indicate the application of judicial mind is all that is expected from the Magistrate.
It is a settled law that at the time of issuing the process, the Magistrate is required to observe and check only the allegations in the complaint, and if the allegations made in the complaint or the chargesheet do not constitute an offense against the accused, then the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
It is also stated by the court that although it is not proper for the High Court to consider the defense of the accused person or to conduct an inquiry in respect of the merits of the allegations if the accused person has placed a document that is beyond any suspicion or doubt, and if it is considered that the allegations against the accused cannot stand, in such cases, in order to prevent abuse of process or injustice, it is important that the High Court shall look into the documents and grant relief to the concerned person by exercising their jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023
Furthermore, it is stated by the court that in the present case, the magistrate has not conducted any inquiry to satisfy himself that the allegations made in the complaint constitute an offense against the In-laws, and there is nothing on the record to show that the Magistrate has applied his mind to reach a prima facie conclusion.
The court also stated that the magistrate has passed a very cryptic order by simply saying that the statement of the wife as well as the statements of her witnesses which were recorded under Section 200 and 202 of CrPC are perused, and the In-laws are summoned, but such order is itself illegal which cannot stand the test of the law.
It is further stated by the court that in the impugned summoning order passed by the magistrate, there is nothing that may indicate that the Magistrate has considered the facts of the case before passing the summoning order against the In-laws, the order clearly lacks application of reflection of judicial mind or discretion, and such order cannot be accepted as a proper judicial legal order which is passed after following the due procedures of the law.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023
In view of the above discussion, the court held that it is clear that the wife has leveled general allegations in the FIR without allegations of any specific act against the In-laws, the impugned summoning order dated 16.08.2022 passed by the Magistrate against the In-laws is cryptic, and the order does not stand the test laid down by the court.
Therefore, the present application is allowed, also the complaint case, and the impugned summoning order dated 16.08.2022 passed by the Magistrate against the In-laws is hereby quashed, and the Magistrate is directed to pass a fresh order in the light of the observations made in this case.
_________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
Conclusion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023
In this article, the Allahabad High Court held that the magistrate has passed a very cryptic order by simply saying that the statement of the wife as well as the statements of her witnesses which were recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC are perused, and the In-laws are summoned, but such order is itself illegal which cannot stand the test of the law.
It is also held that the magistrate has not conducted any inquiry to satisfy himself that the allegations made in the complaint constitute an offense against the In-laws, and there is nothing on the record to show that the Magistrate has applied his mind to reach a prima facie conclusion.
Therefore, the complaint case and the impugned summoning order dated 16.08.2022 passed by the Magistrate against the In-laws are hereby quashed.
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment