LexSHAKSON BELTHISSOR versus STATE OF KERALA & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009) 9 S.C.R. 1187 \ SHAKSON BELTHISSOR A V. STATE OF KERALA & ANR. (Criminal Appeal No. 249 of 2004) JULY 6, 2009 B [DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA AND DR. B. S. CHAUHAN, JJ.] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.482 - Petition under- Quashing of- FIR and charge sheet against husband c alleging commission of offence u/s. 498A /PC - Application uls.482 - Dismissal of, by High Court - Held: Not correct - No ingredient of s.498A /PC in FIR or charge sheet to prima facie constitute a case of cruelty as defined uls. 498A - Neither explanation (a) or (b) of s. 498A attracted - Thus, FIR D and charge sheet against husband qua__shed - Order of High Court aside - Penal Code, 1860 - s.498A. The question which arose for consideration in this appeal was whether High Court was justified in dismissfng E the petition u/s. 482 Cr.P .C. for quashing the FIR and the charge sheet against appellant-husband for the alleged ' ~ commission of offence u/s. 498A IPC. - Allowing the appeal, the Court F HELD: 1 The scope a·nd power of quashing a first information report and charge sheet under section 482 of the CrPC is well settled. The said power is exercised by the court to prevent abuse of the process of law and court but such a power could be exercised only when the G complaint filed by the complainant or the charge sheet filed by the police did not disclose any offence or when the said complaint is found to be frivolous, vexatious or oppressive. [Para 9) [1195-C-D] 1187 H 1188 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 9 S.C.R. A Nagawwa v. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi (1976) 3 SCC 736, Drugs Inspector v. Dr. B.K. Krishna 1981 (2) SCC 454; Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Ram Kishan Rohtagi 1983 (1) SCC 1; State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335; pepsi Foods Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Special Judicial B Magistrate and Others 1998 (5) SCC 749; S. W Palanikar v. State of Bihar 2002 (1) SCC 241; Indian Oil Corpn. v. NEPC, lndiaLtd. (2006)6 SCC736; Kalyani v. Janak C. M_ehtaand Others (2009) t SCC 516 - referred to. 2.1. In the light of the language used in the section C 498AIPC, the provision would be applicable only to such a case where the husband or the relative of the husband of a w~man subjects the said woman to cruelty. When the ingredients of the said section are present in a particular case, in that event the person concerned against whom ,.D the offence is alleged would be tried in accordance wjth law·in a trial instituted against him and if found guilty the accused would be punished with imprisonment for.a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. The said section contains an explanation, which E defines "cruelty" as understood under section 498A IPC. In order to understand the meaning of the expression 'cruelty' as envisaged under section 498A, there must be suc-h ·a -eond'LTtf"on the part of the husband or relatives of the husband of woman which is of such a -nature as F to cause the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health whether mental or physical of the woman. [Para 21] [1206-C-F] 2.2. On examination of the facts of the present case, G particularly the FIR and the charge sheet it is found that there is no such allegation either in the FIR or in the charge sheet making out-a prima facie case as narrated under explanation (a). There is. no allegation that there is any such conduct ori the part of the appellant which could H be said to be amounting to cruelty of such a nature as is i \ SHAKSON BELTHISSOR v. STATE OF KERALA & 1189 ANR. likely to cause the respondent no. 2 to commit suicide or A to cause any injury to her life. The ingredient to cons.titute an offence under explanation (a) of section · 498A IPC are not at all mentioned either in FIR or in charge sheet- and in absence thereof, no case is made out. Therefore, explanationja) as found in section 498A IPC B is clearly not attracted, in the instant case. [Para 22] [1206- F-H; 1207-A-B] 2.3: In order to constitute cruelty under the said provision there has to_. be harassment of the woman with · C a view to .coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable ~ecurity or a case is to be made out to the effect that there is a failure by her or any. person related to her to meet such demand. When the allegation made in the FIR and ·. charge sheet is examined in the instant c
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.