DESH DEEPAK DWIVEDI Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants Desh Deepak Dwivedi and three others, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with prayer to quash order dated 28.7.2020 passed by the Sessions Judge, Maharajganj, in Criminal Revision No. 44 of 2020, Kumkum Dwivedi Vs. Desh Deepak Dwivedi and others, arising out of order dated 17.3.2020 passed by C.J.M., Maharajganj, in? Criminal Complaint Case No. 379 of 2019, Kumkum Dwivedi Vs. Desh Deepak Dwivedi and others, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D. P. Act, P.S. Paniyara, district Maharajganj.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA. Perused the record.

(3.) Learned counsel for applicants argued that Criminal Complaint Case No. 379 of 2019, Kumkum Dwivedi Vs. Desh Deepak Dwivedi and others, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D. P. Act, P.S. Paniyara, district Maharajganj, was filed by O.P. No. 2 against applicants Desh Deepak Dwivedi and three others with contention of demand of dowry, cruelty with regard to it and assault with abuse of criminal intimidation on 31.10.2019. This was by way of an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. The Magistrate took cognizance over it and registered it as a complaint case. An enquiry u/s 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. was made by C.J.M., Maharajganj, and then after complaint was dismissed u/s 203 Cr.P.C. with finding that there was no prima-facie case for summoning. Rather this complaint was with a view to harass the husband and in-laws by complainant. This order was challenged before revisional court of learned Sessions Judge, Maharajganj, wherein the then learned Sessions Judge allowed the revision, thereby quashed the order of Magistrate and remanded the file back for fresh consideration of same. Learned C.J.M., in compliance of order of learned revisional court, decided to have an enquiry by a Gazetted Officer of Police u/s 202(1) Cr.P.C. and it was directed to Superintendent of Police, Maharajganj, for getting enquiry by a Gazetted Police Officer of the occurrence. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Maharajganj, submitted his report in compliance of order of Court of C.J.M. with finding of undue harassment by complainant to her in-laws and contradictions in the date of alleged assault. On the basis of evidence on record, learned C.J.M. again dismissed the complaint u/s 203 Cr.P.C. Complainant filed subsequent Revision No. 44 of 2020 before learned revisional court of District & Sessions Judge, Maharajganj, wherein again revision was allowed and order of learned C.J.M. was set aside with a direction for re-hearing and decision. Meaning thereby once learned C.J.M. has made compliance of direction of learned revisional court and found no ground for passing a summoning order u/s 204 Cr.P.C., again this revision was allowed with the same direction. This remand order was passed under abuse of process of law and was not to be made by learned revisional court in view of law laid down by Apex Court in Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction in Criminal Appeal No.(s) 1874-1875 of 2010, Kooli Saseendran & others Vs. State of Kerala Etc., wherein the Apex Court has held that remand in criminal case should not be usual but sparingly exercised in cases where it is utmost necessary. Hence this application with above prayer.