C482/139/2013 of RAJESH KUMAR TANEJA Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND and ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 139 of 2013 (Under Section 482 Cr.P.C.)

Rajesh Kumar Taneja

….…… Applicant

versus

State of Uttarakhand and Another ………. Respondents

Mr. Prem Kaushal, Brief Holder for the State. None is present on behalf of the respondent no.2.

U. C. Dhyani, J. (Oral)

By means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., applicant seeks to quash the summoning order dated 19.10.2011, under Sections 498A, 420, 120B of IPC and Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No.3887 of 2011, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant Rajesh Kumar Taneja is not even related to husband of the daughter of the complainant. As such, it is argued that the ingredients of the offences alleged are not made out as against the present applicant. It is contended that it is abuse of process of law to prosecute the applicant in the case.

3. Notice was issued to respondent no.2, but none has turned up on his behalf.

4. It appears that the complainant is not interested in prosecuting the accused-applicant.

5. At the time of admission of present C-482 petition, this Court passed an interim order, vide order dated 14.02.2013, and stayed the criminal complaint case initiated against applicant under Sections 498A, 420, 120B of IPC and Section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar, till the next date of listing.

6. There seems to be substance in the contention of leaned counsel for the applicants that the criminal proceedings initiated against the applicant are nothing but abuse of process of the Court.

7. It will be futile exercise to keep present petition under Section C-482 Cr.P.C. pending in this Court.

8. The Court can intervene in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent the abuse of process of law, as has been held by Hon’ble Apex Court in Rajiv Thapar and others vs. Madan Lal Kapoor (2013) 3 SCC 330, Amit Kapoor vs. Ramesh Chander and another, 2013 (1) SCC (Crl.) 986 and Inder Mohan Gosami and another vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, (2008) 1 SCC (Crl.) 259.

9. The petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, therefore, allowed. The summoning order dated 19.10.2011, under Sections 498A, 420, 120B of IPC and Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No.3887 of 2011, pending in the Court Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar, are hereby quashed, qua applicant only.

10. Since present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is being decided in the absence of respondent no.2, therefore, liberty is granted to him to move for recall of this order, if he feels aggrieved with the same.

A.kaur