PRASAD Vs. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the husband and relatives of the de facto complainant. The petitioners apprehend that the police may arrest them on the allegation that they have been guilty of matrimonial cruelty against the wife of the 1st petitioner Geetha by name. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are absolutely innocent and the allegations are raised with vexatious intent. It is prayed that directions may be issued under S.438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submits that no crime has been registered against the petitioners. But the learned Public Prosecutor immediately submits that it is true that a complaint was received from the said Geetha raising allegations of matrimonial cruelty against the petitioners. The police are trying to get the matter settled amicably and no crime has been registered so far. The police have no intention to arrest the petitioners now, it is further submitted.

(3.) Registration of a crime is not sine qua non for invoking the powers under S.438 of the Cr.P.C. If that be so, the police would be able to delay the registration of the crime, get an application under S.438 dismissed, thereafter register a crime and arrest the petitioners. The question is whether the apprehension of arrest entertained by the petitioners is reasonable or not. On the submissions made at the Bar by the learned Public Prosecutor, I find the apprehension entertained by the petitioners to be reasonable. The submissions of the learned Public Prosecutor do further show that even after receipt of the complaint, the police did not think it necessary to register the crime straightaway. That certainly gives the court an indication about the nature and gravity of the allegations raised, I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that the apprehension of the petitioners deserves to be allayed. Appropriate direction under S.438 of the Cr.P.C. can, in these circumstances, be issued.