PRABHAT MOHANTY Vs. AMRIKA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the medium of instant petition, quashment of proceedings pending in criminal complaint titled Amrika v Prabhat Mohanty and others under Sections 405/406 RPC in the Court of learned Special Municipal Magistrate, Jammu is sought by assailing the impugned order dated 22 05 2012 by virtue whereof the trial Court took cognizance of the offence. It 'is contended that the allegations in the complaint did not disclose commission of alleged offences and initiation of proceedings in the complaint was an abuse of process of trial Court. Respondent-Amrika appears to have filed a complaint wherein it was alleged that respondent-Amrika solemnized marriage with the present Petitioner-Prabhat Mohanty in March 2003, in a temple at Muthi Road Morh Roop Nagar, Jammu which was attended by relatives of the respondent-Amrika. It was further alleged in the complaint that after marriage petitioner cohabited with respondent-Amrika and the couple lived as husband wife. Respondent-Amrika had been working as a labourer with different contractors. She claimed to have earned handsome money by working as labourer and mate and entrusted her earnings to the tune of more than Rs. 4 50,000/- to present petitioner who utilized her money for purchasing a Tractor, Tipper, Motor Cycle and also constructed a house in Orissa. Brother of the present petitioner nominated as accused No. 2 in the complaint was alleged to be working as driver of the Tipper, while mother of the petitioner nominated as accused No. 3 in the complaint is said to be residing in the house constructed out of the entrusted money. The petitioner is alleged to have abandoned respondent-Amrika after she was made to forcibly abort. It is alleged in the complaint that respondent-Amrika had contacted the petitioner, but the other accused were extending threats to her. Thus, petitioner is alleged to have misappropriated the money entrusted to him by respondent-Amrika and refused to return the same to her despite demand.

(2.) On consideration of the allegations in the complaint, statement of respondent-Amrika and the witnesses produced by her who were examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C. the learned Magistrate passed the impugned order dated 22.05.2012, which incorporates the allegations in the complaint and records the satisfaction of learned Magistrate regarding existence of a prima facie case justifying the issue of process against the present petitioner and other co-accused, who are his brother and mother for offence under Sections 405/406 RPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner has taken serious exception to the legality and correctness of the impugned order by arguing that the allegations in the complaint read with the statement of respondent-Amrika did not disclose commission of offence under Sections 405/406 RPC. He relied upon the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in State of U.P v. R.K. Srivastava and ors, 1989 CrLJ 2301, wherein it has been held that if the allegations made in the FIR are taken at their face-value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute an offence, the criminal proceedings instituted on the basis of such FIR should be quashed.

(3.) Heard and considered.