Point of Law : While exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India referred to hereinabove, the High Court has to give brief reasons why such an interim order is warranted and/or is required to be passed so that it can demonstrate the application of mind by the Court and the higher forum can consider what was weighed with the High Court while passing such an interim order.

JUDGMENT :

This petition, under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is preferred by Smti. Pranati Mahanta, wife of Shri Arup Kumar Mahanta, for quashing the FIR, dated 16.03.2021, of Dispur P.S. Case No.1025/2021, under Section 457/380 of the IPC.

2. It is to be mentioned here that the aforesaid FIR has been lodged by Shri Arup Kumar Mahanta, husband of the petitioner on 16.03.2021, with the Officer-in-Charge Dispur Police Station, Guwahati.

3. The factual background, leading to filing of the present petition is adumbrated herein below :-

“The petitioner is the wife of the complainant -Shri Arup Kumar Mahanta, who lived in the House No. 9, Chandan Kalita Path, Manik Nagar, Japorigog. The petitioner and the complainant got married as per social rites and rituals of the society and they are blessed with 2 (two) children and both of them are major. The complainant, on 16.03.2021, lodged one FIR against the petitioner with the Dispur Police Station to the effect that while he was absent from his residence with effect from 09.03.2021 till 14.03.2021, the petitioner and other family members entered into his room by breaking open the lock and stolen away a sum of Rs.16 lakhs of his brother, who is a business man, and also stolen a sum of Rs.5 lakhs of his own as well as LIC documents/passbook/cheque books etc., by breaking open the lock of the goodrej and also they have committed theft of documents, duplicate keys of his car by using a ladder from their room to his room. Upon the said FIR, the O.C. Dispur, Police Station registered a case, being Dispur P.S. Case No. 1025/2021, under Section 457/380 of the IPC and started investigation. During investigation, the I.O. has obtain one search warrant from the learned Special Magistrate and conducted search in the house of the petitioner and recovered one key of Honda Amaze Car, bearing registration No. AS-01DX-4999, one policy copy of Royal Sundaram General Insurance, one R/C book of the said car registered in the name of Arup Kr. Mahanta, one service book, one segment advance due loan of SBI Car loan in the name of Arup Kr. Mahanta in present of witnesses.

4. Being highly aggrieved by the aforementioned action of police, the petitioner approach this Court by filing the present petition, on the ground, that she is no way involved in any offence mentioned in the FIR and that the concerned Officer-in-Charge, without any primafacie materials, registered the Dispur P.S. Case No. 1025/2021 under Section 457/380 of the IPC and that the complainant was serving as Deputy Superintendent of Police in C.I.D., Assam and retired on 28.02.2021 and since the year, 2018, the complainant had developed extra marital affairs with one Hiranmoyee Das and since then he started subjecting the petitioner to physical and mental harassment while the petitioner has objected in maintaining such affairs, he often used to threatened her and her children using vulgar language and her daughter, on 14.03.2021, lodged complaint against the complainant which was registered as Dispur P.S. Case No.1011/2021, under Section 294/506 IPC and that due to inhuman mental and physical torture upon the petitioner and her children, the petitioner on 16.03.2021 at about 2.00 PM lodged the FIR before the All Women’s Police Station, Pan Bazar, Guwahati against the complainant, upon which All Women’s P.S. Case No. 68/2021 under Section 498 (A)/294/506 IPC has been registered and that the allegation made in the FIR, dated 16.03.2021, is false and concocted and baseless and afterthought facts and that in spite of being searched in her house, the I.O. could not recover any cash amount as mentioned in the FIR and that the present complaint, lodged by the complainant, is only as a counter blast and to wreak vengeance against the petitioner on the basis of false, fabricated and concocted facts with malafide intention and that no prima-facie case is made out against the petitioner even after perusal of the FIR and therefore, it is contended to allow the peti