The High Court should not quash an F.I.R. unless allegations do not constitute a cognizable offence; serious charges warrant prosecution.

JUDGMENT :

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) :

Heard the parties.

2. Though notice has validly been served upon the opposite party No.2 yet no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party No.2 in spite of repeated calls.

3. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. of Nawadih P.S. Case No.50 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No.805 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 420, 467, 468 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat.

4. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner No.1 is the husband of the informant and petitioner Nos.2 to 5 are the relatives of the petitioner No.1 and the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners have treated the informant with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry of Rs.2,00,000/- and a fridge and treated her with cruelty for not brining the said dowry. It is further alleged that the petitioners, by way of cheating, took the informant to the premises of Civil Court, Giridih and created false documents purported to be an affidavit which was produced as Sulahnama (deed of compromise) by the petitioner No.1 in Original Suit No.111 of 2022 in the Family Court, Giridih and snatched away the son of the informant and has not yet restored his custody to the informant. There is further allegation that the petitioners came to the house of the informant in a Scorpio vehicle without having any registration number plate, abused and assaulted her and criminally intimidated the informant to kill her unless she goes to the court and gives divorce to the petitioner. The informant went to the police station but no action was taken by the police, hence, the complainant/informant filed Complaint Case No.481 of 2022 and upon the same being referred to police under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C., the F.I.R. of this case was registered and police took up investigation of the case which was going on at present.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is false and the documents alleged to be forged are not forged documents rather they were genuine documents which were prepared by the informant herself. Learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Others v. State of Bihar & Others reported in (2022) 6 SCC 599 and submits that the allegations made against the petitioners are false and the same are general and omnibus in nature and do not warrant prosecution. It is further submitted that the petitioner No.1 filed Original Suit No.111 of 2022 for divorce while the complainant/informant filed Original Suit No.245 of 2022 against the petitioners for obtaining the custody of her son and suppressing the material facts above, the complaint was filed which upon being referred to police under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C., the said F.I.R. has been registered. Hence, it is submitted that the F.I.R. of Nawadih P.S. Case No.50 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No.805 of 2022, which is pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat, be quashed and set aside.

6. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing the F.I.R. of Nawadih P.S. Case No.50 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No.805 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 420, 467, 468 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat and submits that this is not a case involving the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code or the provisions of Dowry Prohibition Act, simpliciter as was in the case of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Others v. State of Bihar & Others (supra) rather in this case, serious charges of forgery for the