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 Sections 406, 498-A read with Section 120-B, I. P. C. 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 151/2 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 hot 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 Anr. , 1992 (1) CLR 695, I (1992) 316 (SC) Supreme Court has held that:

(3.) ACCORDINGLY, the petitioners shall be at liberty to make an appropriate application before the Trial Magistrate and in case they can satisfy the Trial Magistrate that no offence is made out against them, the Magistrate may pass appropriate order in this regard.