MRS. DHANALAKSHMI versus R. PRASANNA KUMAR AND ORS.

Citation: [1989] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 165 · Decided: 15-11-1989 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: E.S. VENKATARAMIAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

MRS. DHANALAKSHMI 
A 
v. 
R. PRA.>ANNA KUMAR AND ORS. 
NO_VEMBER 15, 1989 
[E.S. VENKATARAMIAH, CJ., K.N. SINGH AND 
B 
M. FATHIMA BEEVI, JJ.] 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: S. 482-Proceedings instituted on 
complaint-Quashing of-Jurisdiction of High Court-No meticulous 
analysis of case necessary-Complaint to be read as a whole. 
The criminal complaint instituted by the appellant was taken 
cognizance of by the Magistrate for offences under ss. 494, 496, 498-A, 
112, 114, 120, 120-B and 34 IPC. It was alleged that the first respondent 
bad_ married the second respondent while the proceedings for decree of 
divorce were still pending, and that the marriage was performed secretly in 
the presence of respondent Nos. 3 to 6. The High Court, however, on 
the application of the first respondent quashed the proceedings before 
the Magistrate. 
Allowing the appeal by special leave, 
c 
D 
HELD: The High Court was in error in assessin~ the material 
E 
before it and concluding that the complaint cannot be pnneded with. [167C-D] 
In proceedings instituted on complaint exercise of the inherent 
power under s. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the High 
Court to quash the proceedings is called for only in cases where the 
complaint does not disclose any offence or is frivolous, vexatious or 
F 
oppressive. It is not necessary that there should be a meticulous analysis 
of the case, before the trial to find out whether the case would end in 
conviction or not. The complaint has to be read as a whole. [166G; 167A] 
In the instant case, there were specific allegations in the complaint 
disclosing the ingredients of the offence taken cognizance of. It was for 
G 
the complainant to substantiate the allegations by evidence at a later 
stage. In the absence of circumstances to hold prima facie that the comp-
laint was frivolous there was no jurisdiction for the High Court to 
interfere. [167D-E] 
Sharda Prasad Sinha v. State of Bihar, [1977]2 SCR 357; Trilok 
H 
165 
• 
166 
' 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1989] Supp. 2 S.C.R. 
Singh & Ors. v. Satya Deo Tripathi, AIR 1979 SC 850 and Municipal 
A 
Corporation of Delhi v. Purshoiam Dass Jhunjunwala & Ors,, 11983] I 
B 
c 
D 
SCR 895, applied. 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal 
No. 672 of 1989. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 16.2.1988 of the Madras 
High Courtin Crl. Misc. Petition No. 12389 of 1987. 
R. Mohan and R.A. Perumal for the Appellant. 
R.K. Jain, Mrs. Aruna Mathur and A. Mariarputham for the 
Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
M. FATHIMA BEEVI, J. Special Leave granted. 
The appellant married the first respondent on 29.4.1979. They 
lived together until 1982 and have two children. They separated and 
the legal battle commenced in 1983. The first re~pondent moved the 
City Civil Court for divorce. The appellant instituted criminal comp-
laint in the court of the Metropolitan Magistrate. The complaint was 
E 
taken cognizance of for offences under Sections 494, 496, 498-A, 112, 
114, 120, 120-B and 34 !PC against the respondents. It was al)eged that 
the first respondent married the second respondent while the proceed-
ings for decree of divorce were still pending, the marriage was 
performed secretly in the presence of respondent Nos. 3 to 6. On the 
application of the first respondent the High Court by the impugned 
F 
order quashed the proceedings before the Metropolitan Magistrate.' 
Hence the appeal. 
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers the 
High Court to exercise its inherent powers to prevent abuse of the 
process of Court. In proceedings instituted on complaint exercise of 
G 
the inherent power to quash the proceedings is called for only in cases 
where the complaint does not disclose any offence or is frivolous, 
vexatious or oppressive. If the allegations set out in the complaint do 
not constitute the offence of which cognizance is taken by the Magis-
trate it is open to the' High Court to quash the same in exercise of the 
inherent powers under Section 482. It is not. however, necessary that 
H there should be a meticulous analysis of the case, before the trial to find 
MRS. DHANALAKSHMI v. R.P. KUMAR [FATHIMA BEEVI, J.J 
167 
out whether the case would end in conviction or not. The complaint 
has to be read as a whole. If it appears on a consideration of the 
allegations, in the light of the statement on oath of the complainant that 
ingredients of the offence/offences are disclosed, and there is
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.