Major. Dr Man Singh And Others v. State Of Haryana
!
" #$%$ &'
()*) + , ,) & -$&./
&"
/ ,% ))) $ $ & ,% 0 ,%1% -
!
,2 &
))) %3 &" & % '
45 ) -
-
!!!!!!!
-
) "
# $ %
&'( ) )
% "*+, - .) ) /0 12 3%2
(*, (' "7 (7"'
%
&78 &*'9
5
) "'87 - .5)/0 2
)
: 61
(
2 $
7' 7( (7"( ; (, 7" (7"(
" 6 +77777<9 % 6# %
$%
%
%
2 99 99 $2 %2 %
"'9(7 2 % = 3%
% $ %2
$ 1 , #
% >% ; 7? 7+ (7"& 6 (77777<9 6#
%
%
>%
5
$<$ (7"?
1
%
@
1 # 2 $%
$
" %
"? 7' (7"8 % %
6 & : %
inter alia,
(77+ %
% 2 7' 7( (7"( 2 2 / B 2 -supra0
1
( , 99
D % % 2 4%
2 $
2
( ?
%
2 %
( ?
1 6
4
)
2 % ?
: %
% % 2
2 >% (7",
1 5
$ (7", $2 % % 2
>%
(7"& 5
(7"& >% $%
%
4 (7"?
%2% (7"8 1
% %$<%
=
(7"'
5
%
%
%
; (( "( (7"'
61
% %
&"9
) ) $% 2
$2 $
2
%
%2 $
$
2 $% $ 5 $
2 1
% $ %
-supra0 %
2
2
( ?
2 % $ $% %
2
>%2
/$
% )%
3% 2 99 2 % 2 %
2
% % % % $%
12 %2 >%
2 $ "34. Before parting with this case, we would like to observe that a serious relook of the entire provision is warranted by the
( legislation. It is also a matter of common knowledge that exaggerated versions of the incident are reflected in a large number of complaints. The tendency of over implication is also reflected in a very large number of cases.
35. The criminal trials lead to immense sufferings for all concerned. Even ultimate acquittal in the trial may also not be able to wipe out the deep scars of suffering of ignominy. Unfortunately a large number of these complaints have not only flooded the courts but also have led to enormous social unrest affecting peace, harmony and happiness of the society. It is high time that the legislature must take into consideration the pragmatic realities and make suitable changes in the existing law. It is imperative for the legislature to take into consideration the informed public opinion and the pragmatic realities in consideration and make necessary changes in the relevant provisions of law."
+
>%2
/$
% )%
!
"
12 %2 >% A )
"18... In any event the wilful act or conduct ought to be the proximate cause in order to bring home the charge under section 498)A and not de hors the same. To have an event sometime back cannot be termed to be a factum taken note of in the matter of a charge under section 498)A. The legislative intent is clear enough to indicate in particular reference to Explanation (b) that there shall have to be a series of acts in order to be a harassment within the meaning of Explanation (b). The letters by themselves though may depict a reprehensible conduct, would not, however, bring home the charge of section 498)A against the accused. Acquittal of a charge under section 306, as noticed hereinbefore, though not by itself a ground for acquittal under section 498)A, but some cogent evidence is required to bring home the charge of section 498)A as well, without which the charge cannot be said to be maintained..."
7 '
>%2
/$
% )% #$
!
% &'(
( ) *&+ 3% %
&*'9
5) 2 99 $99 $
2
2
$% % %
$99 99
2 %$
%
2 % $ 2%% %
12 %2 >%
@%
&'( ) ) 3% 3%2 2 %
&*'9
5) $ %
2 $ "12. The contours of the power to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 are well defined. In V. Ravi Kumar vs. State represented by Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Salem, Tamil Nadu and others [(2019) 14 SCC 568], this Court affirmed that where an accused seeks quashing of the FIR, invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court, it is wholly impermissible for the High Court to enter into the factual arena to adjudge the correctness of the allegations in the complaint. In M/s. Neeharika Infrastructure (P). Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra and others [Criminal Appeal No.330 of 2021, decided on 13.04.2021], a 3)Judge Bench of this Court elaborately considered the scope and extent of the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
, 1973 It was observed that the power of quashing should be exercised sparingly, with circumspection and in the rarest of rare cases, such standard not being confused with the norm formulated in the context of the death penalty.
* embark upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made therein, but if the Court thinks fit, regard being had to the parameters of quashing and the self)restraint imposed by law, and more particularly, the parameters laid down by this Court in R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab (AIR 1960 SC 866) and State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others [(1992) Supp (1) SCC 335], the Court would have jurisdiction to quash the FIR/complaint. xxx xxx xxx
15. Earlier, in Neelu Chopra and another v. Bharti [(2009) 10 SCC 184], this Court observed that the mere mention of statutory provisions and the language thereof, for lodging a complaint, is not the `be all and end all' of the matter, as what is required to be brought to the notice of the Court is the particulars of the offence committed by each and every accused and the role played by each and every accused in the commission of that offence. These observations were made in the context of a matrimonial dispute involving Section 498A IPC.
16. Of more recent origin is the decision of this Court in Mahmood Ali and others v. State of U.P. and others (Criminal Appeal No. 2341 of 2023, decided on 08.08.2023) on the legal principles applicable apropos Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 Therein, it was observed that when an accused comes before the High Court, invoking either the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 or the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, to get the FIR or the criminal proceedings quashed, essentially on the ground that such proceedings are manifestly frivolous or vexatious or instituted with the ulterior motive of wreaking vengeance, then in such circumstances, the High Court owes a duty to look into the FIR with care and a little more closely.
It was further observed that it will not be enough for the Court to look into the averments made in the FIR/complaint alone for the purpose of ascertaining whether the necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged offence are disclosed or not as, in frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection, to try and read between the lines."
8 * # 2 )% 2 2
2
%
$ %$/
%
&*'9
5) 6
>%2
/$
% )% !
* )
, ' (
( ) * 3%
2 %
&*'9
5) 2 %$/ % $
2 % %$ %/ /
$ %
&*'9
5) "7
2 $ $ 2
( ?
%
2 %2 2
% # %
stridhan
( ?
%
$ $ % $
% # 2% $%
2
2
( ?
$ $
""
2
%
(*, (' "7 (7"'
%
&78 &*'9
5) 2
)
:
61 $
3% 3%
( ?
5
$
B
,)
- % &' (
( ) *&' %$
2 9 i) he shall be represented through his counsel; ii) he shall not delay/stall the trial proceedings; iii) he shall not dispute his identity as accused; iv) he shall have no objection if the prosecution evidence is recorded in his absence but in the presence of his counsel; v) he shall appear before the trial Court as and when required; and vi) any other condition, which the trial Court may impose. "(
2
% -0
-
:
(? 7+ (7(& vishnu E 12< F< E $
F<