01Facts
Respondent No. 2, who was married to the son of accused Nos. 3 and 4, alleged that on 15 March 2023 the petitioners—her in-laws and sisters-in-law—trespassed into her house, abused her and threatened her.
¶ 2–3She lodged her complaint three days later, and, following investigation, the police filed a charge sheet for offences under Sections 504, 506 and 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC; the Magistrate took cognizance in C.C. No. 952/2023.
¶ 2–3The petitioners sought to quash the proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, contending that the complaint was a retaliatory counterblast to a complaint previously lodged by accused No. 3 and to a senior-citizen maintenance and protection application.
¶ 5, 7The earlier complaint against respondent No. 2 had resulted in her acquittal.
¶ 5, 702Issues
i.1. Whether the complaint and charge-sheet material, taken at face value, disclosed the alleged offences against the petitioners
¶ 7–8ii.2. Whether continuation of the criminal proceedings amounted to an abuse of the process of the court warranting quashing under Section 482 CrPC
¶ 5, 7–803Law Applied
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers the High Court to quash criminal proceedings where the material, even taken at face value, does not disclose an offence against the accused and continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of the court.
¶ 1, 8The alleged offences were under Sections 504, 506 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
¶ 1, 3Provisions in the judgment · 5 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 482
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 504Section 506Section 323Section 34
04Reasoning
The court considered the admitted family dispute, the parties’ related proceedings and the three-day delay in lodging the complaint. It found that the complaint contained only bald and omnibus allegations, without specific averments against the petitioners, and regarded it as a retaliatory counterblast to accused No. 3’s complaint, which had ended in acquittal.
¶ 7Concluding that even the charge-sheet allegations, taken at face value, did not make out the charged offences, the court held that allowing the proceedings to continue would abuse the process of the court.
¶ 805Holding
The court answered the issues in the petitioners’ favour and allowed both petitions.
¶ 8It quashed the proceedings against all petitioners in C.C. No. 952/2023, arising from Crime No. 11/2023 and pending before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Koppa, for offences under Sections 504, 506 and 323 read with Section 34 IPC.
¶ 8Original Court PDF
SMT CHAITHRA K VvsTHE STATE BY HARIHARAPURA POLICE
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
