DAYANAND Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings in Crime No. 55/2014 which is culminated in Charge Sheet in C.C. No. 2220/2014 on the file of IV Addl. J.M.F.C. Gulbarga.

(2.) THE brief factual matrix that emanate from the records are that the wife of the petitioner by name Smt. Suchitra lodged a complaint against her husband stating that their marriage took place about 16 -years ago and they were blessed with three children. All the children are studying in different classes. About four years prior to the lodgment of the complaint, the petitioner suspected the fidelity of the complainant and he started abusing, assaulting, humiliating and ill -treating her with cruelty. Making such allegations, it is specifically stated that, at the instance of the elders of the family, there was an advice to the petitioner that he has to pay Rs. 10,000/ - per month, and he should give that money regularly. But, since three months, he stopped payment of the said money and also paying electricity bill, house rent etc., When she questioned for the same, he raised his voice and threatened her with dire consequences and also abused her with filthy language and not only that he assaulted her with hands on 11 -02 -2014. Making such allegations, the complaint was filed and police have investigated the matter and after due enquiry, the police have submitted the charge sheet. The Court after perusal of the entire charge sheet, took cognizance and issued summons to the accused i.e. to the petitioner herein and in turn, he appeared before the Court and enlarged on bail. Presently the case is stand posted for hearing before charge. At this juncture, the present petition is filed.

(3.) IN this regard, while exercising the powers U/Sec. 482 Cr.P.C., this Court cannot go into the truth or falsity of such allegations made. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has paid the rentals and the amount which were due to her and he would like to produce those documents to the Court. But this Court by means of extraneous documents, cannot quash the proceedings. In this regard, it is worth to note here a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in : (2007) 13 Supreme Court Cases 165 between Sanapareddy Maheedhar Seshagiri and Another. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Another, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court held that "High Court should be extremely cautious and slow to interfere with the investigation and or trial of criminal cases and should not stall the proceedings except when it is beyond any manner of the doubt that FIR does not disclose commission of any offence or that the allegations contained in FIR do not constitute any cognizable offence or that the prosecution is barred by law or the High Court is convinced that it is necessary to interfere to prevent abuse of the process of the Court. In dealing with such cases, the High Court has to bear in mind that judicial intervention at the threshold of the legal process initiated against a person accused of committing offence is highly detrimental to the larger public and societal interest. The High Court should not go into the merits of the allegations and possible harassment which may be caused to the petitioner due to the investigation and proceedings before the Court".