Back
2013 Supreme(Gau) 796
Gauhati High Court
C.R. Sarma, J.
Leena Doley - Appellant
Versus
State of Assam and Anr. - Respondent
Crl. Pet. No.428 of 2012
Decided On : 05-11-2013
For the Petitioner: Mr. P.K. Goswami.
For the Respondents: Mr. G.N. Sahewalla.
Headnote:
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 482, 199 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 500 – Quashment of Proceedings – By this application, filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 petitioner, namely, Smt. Leena Doley, who is an accused in C.R. Case, pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Kamrup, Guwahati has prayed for quashing said proceeding and setting aside the impugned order, passed in the said case, whereby Magistrate, First Class, while taking cognizance of offence under section 500 of the Indian Penal Code issued summons to the petitioner – Held, In absence of any imputation against the complainant, she cannot be held to be an aggrieved person, within the meaning of section 199, Cr.PC. – That apart, the complaint, filed by the private respondent, does not indicate that the accused had made any imputations against her warranting a proceeding for offence under section 500, IPC. – It appears that the complaint has been filed for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite her due to the imputations, made by her, against the husband of the complainant. – Therefore, in view of the principles, laid down in the case of Bhajanlal (supra), complaint filed by the private respondent, in respect of the imputations made against her husband, is not maintainable. – Principle that what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly will apply in the present case, inasmuch as the private respondents husband, against whom allegation of sexual harassment has been made, cant file defamation case against the victim. – His wife also cannot bring criminal action for the same – Continuance of the proceeding will yield no fruit, except causing unnecessary harassment to the accused, because lodging of a complaint, alleging sexual harassment against the husband of the complainant, cannot be a ground to compel the victim to face defamation case, during the pendency of the complaint filed by the alleged victim. – Rather, it will amount to abuse of process of court. – Court find sufficient merit in this criminal petition requiring, interference, in exercise of jurisdiction under section 482, Cr.PC. – Criminal Petition Allowed
2. The material facts of the case, as required for disposal of this petition, may, in brief, be stated as follows :
The petitioner has been serving as the Additional Superintendent of Police, Dial 100 PCR, Guwahati City. She, in her said capacity, attended an official meeting, on 13.3.2012, in connection with inauguration of the project namely, "Dial 100" in the office of the Director General of Police, Assam and the said meeting was attended, amongst others, by the Inspector General of Police (Logistics) Shri Mukesh Agarwal, who is the husband of the private respondent. The petitioner, after the said meeting, in order to discuss some follow up action, visited the office of the Inspector General of Police (Logistics) and he finding her alone, in his office, suggested her to accompany him to some outside location for a holiday break. The petitioner, being annoyed, demanded apology from the said senior officer for making such lewd remarks and he also, asking her to forgive him, assured that he would never repeat such things in future. According to the petitioner, after returning home, she told her husband about the said incident and immediately, thereafter, called up said senior officer's wife, i.e., the private respondent and narrated her the entire episode. The petitioner, apart from verbally reporting the matter to the Director General of Police, Assam, on 13.3.2012, also submitted a formal complaint, on 15.3.2012, alleging sexual harassment and issued copies of the same to (1) Smt. Mamta Sharma, Chairperson, National Commission for Women, 4, Deen Dayal Upadhayaya Marg, New Delhi-110002, (2), Smt. B. Bhamathi, Addl. Secretary, Centre State, Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi-110001, (3) Shri N.K. Das, IAS, Chief Secretary, Assam, Dispur, Guwhati, (4) Smt. T. Y Das, IAS, Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister of Assam, Dispur, Guwahati, (5) Smt. Jishnu Baruah, IAS, the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Home, Political Border Areas and Passport Department, Dispur, Guwahati and (6) Smt. Mira Baruah, Chairperson, Assam State Commission for Women, Bal Bhwan, Uzanbazar, Giwahati. The petitioner found that the incident was reported in several dailies and also telecasted through local television channels.
3. The opposite party No. 2, namely Smt. Vanita Agarwal, i.e., the wife of the Inspector General of Police (Logistics), on 19.3.2012, filed a Complaint Case, being Case No. 672C of 2012, before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kamrup, Guwahati, alleging, therein, that the petitioner had circulated the said complaint, dated 15.3.2012, to different agencies, officials, media and public in general, bringing false allegations against her husband and thereby caused harm to the reputation of the complainant, i.e., opposite party No. 2 and her husband and, thus, committed the offences under sections 499/500, IPC.
4. On receipt of the complaint, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Kamrup, Guwahati, on 29.3.2012, took cognizance of offence under section 500, IPC and issued summons to the petitioner.
Aggrieved by the taking of cognizance and issuance of process aforesaid, the petitioner has come up with this quashing petition.
According to the petitioner, the impugned order, dated 29.3.2012, was passed in contravention of the provision of law and without application of mind inasmuch as the complaina
