A petitioner can seek to quash an FIR under Section 482 Cr.P.C. if the allegations do not specifically implicate them, thus preventing abuse of judicial process.

JUDGMENT :

Virender Singh, J.

1. Petitioner Shubham Sharma has filed the present petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Cr. P.C.) for quashing of FIR No. 74 of 2022, dated 4.5.2022, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the FIR in question’), registered under Sections 498A, 323, 406, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC’), with Police Station, Amb, Tehsil Amb, District Una, H.P., as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, stated to be pending before the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Amb, District Una, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’).

2. The petitioner has filed the petition on the ground that his elder brother, namely, Ankush Sharma was married to respondent No. 2, in the year 2018. As per the petitioner, respondent No. 2, for the reasons best known to her, lodged FIR in question, in which, Police has conducted the investigation and submitted chargesheet, against the petitioner, as well as, his brother and parents. There are total four accused in the case, pending adjudication, before the learned trial Court.

3. According to the petitioner, he has completed his Internship, after passing MBBS in March, 2019 at MGM College, Aurangabad (Maharashtra). Thereafter, he had joined Bhatia Coaching Academy at New Delhi, for the purpose of preparation, for appearing in the NEET-PG examination.

4. As per the case set up by the petitioner, he has nothing to do with the offence, for which, he has been named as accused, in this case. It is the further case of the petitioner that even if the entire allegations, levelled in the FIR, are taken as it is, then, no case is made out against the petitioner.

5. According to the petitioner, he is innocent person and is not even remotely connected with the alleged crime.

5.1 Heavily relying upon the statements of witnesses, recorded during the investigation, the petitioner has prayed that nothing has come out against him, during the investigation.

6. On the basis of above facts, he has prayed that the present petition may kindly be allowed by quashing the FIR in question, registered against him.

7. Alongwith the petition, he has annexed the copy of report under Section 173(2) Cr. P.C., the complaint made by respondent No.2, copy of the FIR, as well as, statements of the witnesses, recorded during the investigation. All these documents have been annexed to show that no case is made out against him and proceedings initiated against him are nothing, but abuse of process of law.

8. When, put to notice, respondent No. 1 has filed reply, by taking preliminary objections, that the petition is not maintainable, as charges have not been framed by the learned trial Court; the petitioner has no locus standi to file the present petition; the petition is not sustainable in the eyes of law; and that the petitioner has concealed the material facts, from the scrutiny of the Court.

9. On merits, the petition has been contested on the ground that at the instance of respondent No. 2, the FIR in question has been registered, against the petitioner and others, in which, investigation has been conducted and Police has submitted the charge-sheet, before the learned trial Court. It is the specific case of the respondent-State that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused persons, including the petitioner herein.

10. The prayer, so made in the petition, has