1. Heard finally by consent.

2. By this application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. the applicants have prayed to quash and set aside the proceedings in Regular Criminal Case No.202/2010 arising out of Crime No.14/2010 registered by Police Station Tamgaon, Tah. Sangrampur, Dist. Buldhana with accusations for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506, 504 r/w Section 34 of the IPC pending on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sangrampur, Dist. Buldhana. It appears that the applicants are facing proceedings arising from F.I.R. No.41/2010, which was registered on 17.04.2010 by Tamgaon Police Station, Dist. Buldhana on the basis of complaint lodged by Smt. Shabana Chhotushah against her husband and seven others on the ground that they have conspired together to harass the first informant mentally and physically with a view to demand dowry.

3. According to the first informant, she had married with the accused Lalshah @ Chhotushah Yunus Shah six years prior to the complaint. After her marriage, she went to Zadegaon for cohabitation with her husband. Thereafter, they had also stayed at Nirod for about a year. According to first informant, accused no.1 to 8 used to treat her with cruelty, both mentally and physically on the pretext that dowry was not paid by her mother. On that pretext, they had demanded sum of Rs. 35,000/and threatened her that if she come back again without bringing dowry she may be murdered. She was compelled to leave the matrimonial home and she is residing with her mother at Nirod.

4. Since 23 days prior to lodging of the F.I.R., on 17.04.2010, at about 1000 a.m., accused no.1 to 7 came on one white jeep car and threatened her to withdraw cases filed by her in Khamgaon Court and demanded dowry in the of sum of Rs.35,000/from her mother. At that time, she and her mother were frightened. Accused nos.1 to 8 attacked both of them. They were rescued by neighbourers. The accused had also threatened that if any complaint is lodged with Police then the first informant and her mother will lose their hands and legs. Under these circumstances, the first informant has prayed for stern action against the accused. Submission on behalf of respondent is that the chargesheet has already been filed in respect of these accusations in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tamgaon under Sections 498A, 506, 504 r/w Section 34 of the I.P.C.

5. Learned Advocate made a reference to the ruling in PreetiGupta and another Vs. State of Jharkhand and another (2010) 7 SCC 667, Pashaura Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2010) 11 SCC 749 and Mandakini Kiran Landge and others Vs. State of Maharashtra & another reported in 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 2081and submitted that the powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be exercised even if trial is to begin and even if the petitioner has alternate remedy of seeking discharge. On behalf of respondent, it is also submitted that the applicant/husband had already communicated Talakto his wife and therefore, she could not have lodged complaint against him and his family members under Sections 498A, 506, 405 r/w Section 34 of the I.P.C.

6. I have perused the rulings cited by the learned Advocate appearing for the applicants. The Apex Court in Preeti Gupta’s case explained ambit of courts' powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Every High Court has inherent power to act ex debito justitiae to do real and substantial justice, for the administration of which alone it exists, or to prevent the abuse of process of court. Inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised:

(i) to give effect to an order under the Code;

(ii) to prevent the abuse of process of court; and

(iii) to otherwise secure the ends of justice.

7. It is further explained that the powers possessed by the High Court under Section 482 of the Code are very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. The Court must be careful to see that its decision in ex