REETA Vs. PARVEEN SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the complaint and the order summoning the accused mentioned in the complaint including the petitioners. Complaint was filed by Smt. Parveen Sharma under Section 406, 498-A read with Section 120-B, IPC. After recording the preliminary evidence, the Trial Magistrate on being satisfied that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused persons, summoned all the accused under the aforesaid sections. Quashing of the complaint as well as the order of summoning the petitioners has been sought on the ground that petitioner No. 1 was hardly 12 years of age at the time of marriage and was not more than 15-1/2 years at the time of filing of the complaint and also on the ground that in the complaint, there are only vague allegations against the petitioners.

(2.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, I am of the opinion that no case is made out for quashing of the complaint and the order of summoning the petitioners at this stage. The petitioners, if they are so aggrieved of the order of summoning, can always file an application before the trial Magistrate that process against them ought not to have been issued. The Magistrate is always empowered to drop the proceedings if he is satisfied on reconsideration of the complaint that there is no offence for which the petitioners could be tried. In K.M. Mathew v. State of Kerala and another, 1992(1) Recent Criminal Reports 232 : 1992(1) CLR 695, Supreme Court has held that :-

(3.) PERSONAL appearance of the petitioners shall not be insisted upon and they shall be allowed to appear through counsel provided they give an undertaking in writing that they will appear as and when required by the Court. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. Order accordingly.