AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
By the Court:- Heard the parties.
Though, notice has validly been served upon the opposite party no.2, yet no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party no.2 in spite of repeated calls.
This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No.1209 of 2018 instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 375(2)(4), 376(N), 420, 323, 504, 506 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Jamshedpur.
The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner deceived the complainant by falsely promising to marry her and induced the complainant so deceived to have sexual relationship with him and later on, the petitioner also forcibly established physical relationship with the complainant and the petitioner has also duped the complainant of Rs.2 lakhs and also taken away the ATM card of the complainant.
On the basis of the complaint, statement on solemn affirmation and the statement of the enquiry witnesses, the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Jamshedpur found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Section 406 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the complaint has been instituted just to mount undue pressure on the petitioner and the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that at best, the allegations can give rise to a civil dispute, but no criminal offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, it is lastly submitted that the prayer as prayed for by the petitioner in this Cr.M.P., be allowed.
Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Cr.M.P and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner of obtaining the consent of the complainant for physical relationship by way of cheating her; besides there is also allegation against the petitioner of cheating the complainant to the tune of Rs.2 lakhs. It is next submitted that the contention of the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner are all false is a subject matter of the trial, but the same cannot be a ground to quash the entire criminal proceeding at this nascent stage when the petitioner is keeping himself out of the legal process by evading to appear before the trial Court for over 07 years. Therefore, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed.
Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is a settled principle of law that the defence of the accused person of the case and the veracity of the evidence put forth by the accused person, cannot be considered by the High Court, in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., as that would be the job of the trial court, as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Awadh Kishore Gupta & Ors. reported in (2004) 2 Supreme 501.
It is also a settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. vs. Akhil Sharda & Ors. reported in 2022 LiveLaw SC 594 that no mini trial can be conducted by the high court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the relevant portion of which reads as under :-
“Having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High court has set aside the criminal proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 CrPC, it appears that the High Court has virtually conducted a mini trial, which as such is not permissible at this stage and while deciding the application under Section 482CrPC. As observed and held by this court in a catena of decisions, no mini trial can be conducted by the High Court in exercise of power under Section 482CrPC, jurisdiction and at the stage of deciding the application under Section 482CrPC, the High Court cannot get into appreciation of evidence of the particular case being considering. (Emphasis supplied)
Now coming to the facts of the case, there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that the petitioner obtained consent of the complainant for sexual relationship by way of cheating and further, there is allegation against the petitioner of cheating the complainant and defrauding to the tune of Rs.2 lakhs.
Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that, if the entire allegations made against the petitioner are considered to be true in their entirety; then the offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code is made out against the petitioner, therefore, this Court is not inclined to accede to the prayer of the petitioner made in this Cr.M.P. in exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Accordingly, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, is dismissed.