The scope under section 482 of CrPC does not allow for the appreciation of evidence and arriving at a conclusion regarding the allegations in the FIR.

JUDGMENT :

Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

The present applicants are facing trial of the Criminal Case No.5148 of 2022, “State Vs. Usha and others”, wherein, they have been summoned by the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, to be tried for the offences under sections 186, 332, 353, 427, 504 and 506 of IPC, which stood registered against them, as a consequence of the culmination of the investigation into the set of allegations leveled in the FIR No.364 of 2022, dated 25.06.2022.

2. The argument of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the entire story as narrated in the FIR cannot be believed with, because it was nothing but a tussle of powers between the applicant, who is the wife of an army man and amongst the police force, who had gone to the applicants’ house to serve the notice under section 41 (ka), in pursuance to the earlier FIR No.245 of 2022, which was registered under sections 323, 452, 504, 506 of IPC and section 3 (1) (r) of the SC and ST Act.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted, that the entire set of allegation, which has been leveled against the present applicants in the FIR, is not sustainable because no such incident had actually chanced. Rather, the atrocities were exercised by the police personnel, and none of the allegations pertaining to the indecent act on the part of the applicants could be said to have been made out from the apparent reading of the FIR. In fact, the attempt, which has been made by the applicants, to substantiate that none of the offences as complained of in the FIR, is not made out against the applicants. He has attempted to draw the attention of this Court to the various photographs, which were placed on record, to show, that rather the atrocities were exercised against her by the police personnel, and not by the present applicants.

4. At this stage, it could not be safe to venture into making any observation, as to who could be attributed with the allegation of commission of the offence, which has been complained of in the FIR, and particularly, in the context of the chargesheet, which has been submitted by the Investigating Officer, after examining as many as 12 witnesses, including the documents, which have been placed before it and the CD, observing thereof that prima facie the offence as leveled against the present applicants in pursuance to the FIR No.364, dated 25.06.2022, is made out against the present applicants, based on which, the cognizance has been taken.

5. In fact, the learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that institution of the present FIR at the behest of the police officials is a malicious proceedings itself because none of the documents which have been filed in support of his case, in C482 application, could be said to make out an offence against the present applicants. Rather, to the contrary, it has been argued that the applicants were manhandled by the police personnel, who have gone to serve the notice under section 41 of the CrPC.

6. The entire argument of the learned counsel for the applicants, in fact, is an attempt made by the applicants to invoke the jurisdiction under section 482 of CrPC, to venture into the evidence and to appreciate the same in order to establish and appreciate the argument extended by the applicants, and the set of allegations leveled in the FIR. In fact, this Court is of the view, that the C482 application is limited in the exercise of its jurisdiction, because it has been the consistent view expressed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the judgment as reported in AIR 2022 SC 41, “State of Odisha Vs. Pratima Mohanty Etc.”, wherein, in paragraph no.6 of the judgment, the Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that in the exercise of jurisdiction by the High Court under section 482 of CrPC, for quashing of the criminal proceedings, the High Court is not supposed to venture to appreciate and enter into the merits of the allegations and to conduct a mini trial by weighing the evid