At the stage of taking cognizance and issuing process, the Magistrate is only required to see the sufficiency of the material for proceeding further, not to meticulously examine the evidence. The court also highlighted the distinction between cases instituted on complaint and those based on a police report, emphasizing the sufficiency of material for taking cognizance and issuing summons.

JUDGMENT :

(Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, J.)

1. Heard Shri Saksham Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicants-Ravi Kumar Bharti @ Raju, Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh and Munna Lal with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 25.04.2022 filed in FIR No. 340, P.S. Kotwali Sadar, District Kheri under Sections 498-A, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 against the applicants and also the entire proceedings including the summoning order dated 25.07.2022 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Kheri in Case No. 8716 of 2022 Case Crime No. 340 of 2022 State Vs. Ravi Kumar Bharti @ Raju and others.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants while drawing attention of this Court towards the First Information Report as well as the statements of the prosecution witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., submits that even if the case of the prosecution is believed as it is the same shall not attract the Section 498-A IPC as admittedly the marriage has not been solemnized due to the lack of 'Saptpadi'.

4. It is further submitted that the instant case is a glaring example of malicious prosecution as no specific role has been assigned to any accused persons either in the First Information Report or in the statement of prosecution witnesses and omnibus allegations have been levelled.

5. It is also submitted that FIR has been lodged only for the purpose of restraining the applicant from marrying to a girl of his choice and the Investigating Officer has not investigated the allegations of FIR in right perspective and submitted charge sheet by making cursory investigation.

6. It is further submitted that the trial court has also not considered the material in right perspective and has taken the cognizance in a mechanical way by passing a stereotype order, thus all the proceedings are nothing but the abuse of process of law and the same be quashed.

7. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that at the stage of taking cognizance and issuance of summons / process to the accused persons the Magistrate is not required to meticulously examine the evidence as is required during the course of the trial whether the duty of the Magistrate or the Special Court is to see the sufficiency of the material only for the purpose of proceeding further and the veracity of the statement could not be a subject matter at that stage.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record and keeping in view the order intended to be passed the issuance of notice to opposite party no.2 is hereby dispensed with.

9. Perusal of the record in the light of submissions made by the parties would reveal that the First Information Report lodged by the father of the bride would reveal that the allegations of receiving Rs. 1,00,000/-in cash and gold ring as well as demand of Rs. 7,50,000/-have been levelled against the accused persons. No doubt allegations are general with a specific role to the applicant no.2-Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh. Similar is the situation of the prosecution witnesses whose statements have been recorded by the trial court.

10. So far as the contention of learned counsel for the applicant with regard to the taking of cognizance and issuance of process under Section 204 Cr.P.C. is concerned the law on this issue is now no more res integra and the same has been set at rest by many pronouncements of Hon'ble Supreme Court and in crux it is desirable for the Magistrate or the Special Court as the case may be to visualize at the stage of taking cognizance and issuing of process that there must be sufficient material in order to proceed further. Certainly the exercise of meticulously examining the evidence or the material submitted by the Investigating Officer under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. is not contemplated at that stage as it is the business to be done during the course of trial. It is also to be reminded th