The power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly and with caution, especially in cases where investigation is pending, and does not permit the court to go into disputed questions of fact or appreciate the defense of the accused.

JUDGMENT :

Vishal Mishra, J.

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is finally heard.

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashment of First Information Report registered in respect of Crime No. 51/2021 at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Gwalior for the offences under sections 498A, 506, 323, 34 of IPC and section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and all other consequential proceedings consequent thereto.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no. 2 has lodged the FIR against the petitioner alleging therein that she got married with the petitioner no. 1 on 13.4.2021 and it is alleged that the present petitioners demanding Rs. 2 Lakhs from the respondent no. 2 and further the respondent no. 2 was harassed for demand of dowry. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they have has not involved in the alleged crime and the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case and they have not committed any offence in any manner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment passed in the case of State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajanlal and others, 1992 Suppl. (1) SCC 335 and Vineet Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P. and another, (Criminal Appeal No. 577 of 2017 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 287 of 2017) and prayed for quashing the entire consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR registered at Crime No. 51/2021 at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Gwalior.

3. Per Contra counsel for the State has opposed the petition and has argued that investigation is pending in the case and as per the settled legal preposition pending investigation FIR should not be quashed and he has prayed for dismissal of the petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. In the present case, First Information Report has been registered and the matter has to be investigated by the police authority and at this stage from bare perusal of the F.I.R., it can never be said that no case is made out against the present petitioners.

6. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal, (1992) Supp (1) SCC 335 in paragraph 102 and 103 has held as under:-

"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficient channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.

(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirely do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Sec