Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 498A—Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961—Section 3/4—Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 177 and 482—Cruelty—Cognizance of offence—Appreciation of evidence is also not permissible in exercise of inherent powers—If allegations set out in complaint does not constitute offence of which cognizance has been taken, it is open to High Court to quash the same in exercise of its inherent power—This is a clear case of abuse to process of Court, particularly when Court of Muzaffarpur had taken cognizance ignoring factual matrix that offences were alleged to be committed either at Bangalore or at Khagaria—Allegation of demand of dowry is not against any specific person, rather a general and vague allegation has been made—Cognizance order quashed—Complainant given liberty to file a fresh case before Court having jurisdiction to entertain such complaint—Cr. Misc. Application allowed. (Paras 9, 10, 11, 13 and 14)

Cases Referred:

R. L. Kapoor vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 SC 866; Bhajan Lal vs. State of Haryana, 1992 supp.(1) SCC, 335 : 1992, SCC (Cri. 426); Pramod Suryavan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra, (2019) 11 SCC 608; Dhruv Ram Murlidhar Sonar vs. State of Mah