SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(J&K) 588

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Sanjay Kumar Gupta, J.
Smt. Prasanta Rani & ors. – Petitioners
Vs.
State & anr. – Respondents
561-A Cr.P.C. No. 232 of 2011, MP No.263 of 2011
Decided On : 14-09-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. P.N. Raina, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Deeksha Handoo, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. S.S. Nanda, Sr. AAG

The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to quash an FIR under Section 561-A of the Cr.P.C and the requirement for allegations to disclose a cognizable offense.

Headnote:

Inherent Jurisdiction - Quashment of FIR - Section 561-A Cr.P.C - 498-A, 420, 506, 34 RPC - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the application of Section 561-A of the Cr.P.C and the allegations under Sections 498-A, 420, 506, 34 of the RPC. The court highlighted the legal provisions and their interpretations in quashing the FIR.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners invoked the inherent jurisdiction of the Court seeking quashment of an FIR registered at Police Station GRP, Jammu. The petitioners, including the real mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the complainant, were accused of various offenses. The court analyzed the allegations and the jurisdiction of the Magistrate in directing the registration of the FIR.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the allegations in the FIR did not disclose any cognizable offense and were absurd and inherently improbable. The court also noted that the complaint was maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused. The court held that the FIR was quashed.

Issues: The issues involved the jurisdiction of the Magistrate to direct the registration of the FIR, the territorial jurisdiction of the police, and the absurdity and mala fide nature of the allegations.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the provisions of Section 156(3) Cr.P.C and Sections 177 to 184 Cr.P.C to determine the territorial jurisdiction and the power of the Magistrate to order investigation. The court also applied the principles outlined in the case of State of Telangana v Habib Abdullah Jeelani & ors. to decide the case.

Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR registered at Police Station GRP, Jammu under Sections 498-A, 420, 506, 34 RPC.

JUDGMENT :

1. Petitioners invoke inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 561-A Cr.P.C. seeking quashment of FIR No.10/2011 dated 10.09.2011 registered at Police Station GRP, Jammu under Sections 498-A, 420, 506, 34 RPC.

2. In the petition, it is stated that petitioner No.1 is the real mother-in-law and petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 are brother-in-law of complainant/respondent No.2, they are all married having children. It is stated that one deceased Raj Kumar Dewan was the head of the family and one eldest son Sanjay Dewan is the husband of complainant/respondent No.2 namely Smt. Geetika Dewan. The entire family lived jointly at 70-A Saket Meerut, U.P. Both Sanjay and Geetika also lived with the petitioners and deceased R.K.Dewan as the member of joint family continuously from their date of marriage upto 25.02.2011. It stated that head of the family Sh. R.K.Dewan unfortunately died in a fire massacre on 10.04.2006. Neither petitioners nor respondent No.2-Geetika and Sanjay Dewan after their marriage have at any stage lived at Jammu. It is further stated that Dewan family is a well known business/industrialist family of Meerut. The family has various businesses and run through companies, firms and society. Late R.K.Dewan and petitioner No.1 also created one trust under the name and style of Aryaman Educational Society 70-A, Saket Meeruit in the year 2002-03. The object and purpose of the trust was to set up an educational institutions/school for imparting education to children of all caste, creed and colour without distinction. The petitioners along with Sanjay Dewan and Geetika Dewan were the founder Trustee/members of the society. The trust was found under the complete control of Sanjay Dewan being the eldest son. Thereafter assets of the trust were created by deceased R.K. Dewan and petitioner No.1 and a school under the name and style of Dewan Public School International, Rithani, Partapur, Meeruit came up on the assets being run, manage and control by the above said Aryaman Society. It is further stated that the family had always reposed all trust faith and confidence in Sanjay Dewan being the eldest son of the family and petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 paid all respect and honour to the eldest brother and always obeyed to the command and directions of Sanjay Dewan without ever questioning the decision and directions as abiding younger brothers. Sanjay Dewan after the death of Sh. Raj Kumar Dewan became more dominant in the family businesses and Geetika Dewan at home. The family still continued to repose all the trust and confidence in Sanjay and Geetika in routine and regular course of business and family. In an around July 2010, the petitioners started getting information of mis-appropriation of funds, misdeeds, misconduct, fraud and forgery committed by Sanjay Dewan in the business. Though it was really shocking and hard to believe but as evidence started pouring in, and Sanjay’s illegal acts, deeds and things got corroborated and confirmed his fraud was fully highlighted being in crores resulted into unhappiness and disputes in the family. Consequently a civil suit being OS No.207/2011 ‘Dewan Steels Ltd. vs. M/s Vasudev Industries Pvt. Ltd., and Sanjay Dewan’ was filed on 21.02.2011 in the Court of Civil Judge, Sr. Division Meerut. The suit was for declaration of illegal null and void sale deed of immoveable property fraudulently sold by Sanjay Dewan. Sanjay Dewan on coming to know of the filing of the above said suit got very angry and flaired up. He created great nuisance in the house. He misbehaved with the petitioners and other members of the family, threatening them for dire consequences. He even threatened to involve the petitioners into false and frivolous criminal cases if the suit is not withdrawn. It is further stated that Sanjay and Geetika along with the children on 25.02.2011 left the family house 70-A, Sake




















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top