DISHA KAPOOR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A disgruntled wife, is the petitioner in this Special Leave Petition, aggrieved with the invocation of Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(the Cr. PC) by the High Court of Allahabad to quash a proceeding initiated by the petitioner under Sec. 156(3) of the Cr.PC. The second respondent herein who is the husband of the petitioner along with the third and fourth respondents who are his parents, approached the High Court under Sec. 482, Cr.PC against the summons issued by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow in Complaint Case No.9780 of 2022. The allegations levelled by the petitioner in the complaint case were of offences under Sec. 498A, 325 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Ss. 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. In fact, the petitioner had arrayed ten persons in the complaint; her husband, his parents, two brothers of his father, their wives and three children of three brothers, totalling ten. The Magistrate after perusing the complaint, by the impugned order dtd. 8/11/2023, noticed many contradictions in the stand of the complainant as coming forth from the complaint and the statements recorded under Sec. 200 and 202, Cr.PC. It was found that there was no case to summon any of the persons arrayed in the complaint, except, the husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant, specifically relying on the judgment in Geeta Mehrotra and Anr. v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr,(2012) 10 SCC 741.

(2.) The learned Single Judge, before whom the petitioner appeared in person, quashed the proceedings initiated relying on Preeti Gupta and Anr. V. State of Jharkhand and Anr,(2010) 7 SCC 667 which noted with anguish the rapidly increasing matrimonial litigations in the country roping in the close relatives of the husband and even members of the extended family, as in this case, on allegations of harassment. This requires the Courts to be doubly cautious and extremely careful in dealing with such complaints, especially since the ultimate object of justice is to find out the truth and not only to punish the guilty but also to protect the innocent. It was also emphasised that in the event of the proceedings being found to be an abuse of process of Court, then necessarily the power under Sec. 482, Cr. PC should be invoked to secure the ends of justice.

(3.) We heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/complainant, Mr.Dinesh Dwivedi, learned Senior Counsel and Mr. Shaurya Sahay, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.