# Chitra @ Bebi v. State of U.P. & Anr

- **Citation:** (2021) 7 ILRA 777
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2021-07-16
- **Case number:** Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 316 of 2020
- **Bench:** J.J. Munir
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/chitra-bebi-v-state-of-u-p-anr-47264
- **Pages:** 6

## Headnote

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 -
Section 482 - An absurd and incredible
prosecution,
that
is
virtually
persecution of an innocent person,
ought to be undone by the High Court
in whatever proceedings, a patent
abuse of process of comes to its notice.
Here, as said above, this Court has no
manner of doubt that the impugned
prosecution
giving
rise
to
these
proceedings against the applicant, is a
patent abuse of process of court,
founded on incredible allegations.

It is settled law the inherent powers
conferred upon the High Court ought to be
exercised in order to secure the ends of
justice, wherever it is found that the
criminal
proceedings
are
manifestly
attended with malafides, are incredible
and amount to an abuse of the process of
the Court. (Para 15, 16, 17)

Criminal
application
accordingly
allowed. (E-2)

Judgements/ Case law relied upon:-

## Text

7 All. Chitra @ Bebi Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
777
mandated finality being accorded to the
adjudication which was undertaken in
accordance with the procedure enunciated
by the Supreme Court. There was thus in
such cases no further requirement of the
matter being considered by a HighPowered Committee. As found by this
Court, the directions in Jai Ram can only
be recognised as applying to those matters
where an adjudication in accordance with
the directions issued in Banwasi were yet
to be finalized or had remained pending.
No direction or order of the Supreme Court
in Banwasi required or mandated a further
scrutiny
or
review
of
a
completed
adjudication process.

25. For all the aforesaid reasons, the
writ petition is allowed. The impugned order
dated 06 October 2018 is hereby quashed.
The matter shall stand remitted to the third
respondent who shall consider and decide the
application of the petitioner afresh and in
accordance with the observations made
hereinabove. The third respondent upon remit
shall ensure that the process of consideration
is concluded and final orders passed within 1
month of the presentation of a duly
authenticated copy of this order. The Court
leaves it open to the third respondent to grant
an opportunity of hearing to the private
respondents also. However, the rights of
parties inter se shall be liable to be considered
and
decided
in
accordance
with
the
observations made in this judgment.
----------
(2021)07ILR A777
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 16.07.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J.
Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 316 of 2020

Chitra @ Bebi ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri Atul Kumar, Sri Deepak Dubey, Sri M.J.
Akhtar, Ms. Udita Upadhyay, Sri Imran
Khan, Sri V.M. Zaidi (Senior Adv.)

Counsel for the Opposite Parties:
A.G.A., Sri Amit Daga

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 -
Section 482 - An absurd and incredible
prosecution,
that
is
virtually
persecution of an innocent person,
ought to be undone by the High Court
in whatever proceedings, a patent
abuse of process of comes to its notice.
Here, as said above, this Court has no
manner of doubt that the impugned
prosecution
giving
rise
to
these
proceedings against the applicant, is a
patent abuse of process of court,
founded on incredible allegations.

It is settled law the inherent powers
conferred upon the High Court ought to be
exercised in order to secure the ends of
justice, wherever it is found that the
criminal
proceedings
are
manifestly
attended with malafides, are incredible
and amount to an abuse of the process of
the Court. (Para 15, 16, 17)

Criminal
application
accordingly
allowed. (E-2)

Judgements/ Case law relied upon:-

1. Sanjay Kumar Rai Vs St. of U.P & anr.,
2021 SCC OnlineSC 367.

(Delivered by Hon'ble J.J. Munir, J.)

The impugned proceedings arise from
Case Crime No. 224 of 2019, under
778 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Sections 395, 323, 307, 304, 506, 147, 149
of the Indian Penal Code, 18601, Police
Station
-
Meerapur,
District
-
Muzaffarnagar. This crime was registered
in immediate succession to Case Crime No.
223 of 2019, under Sections 306, 506 IPC,
lodged at the same police station by a
brother of the informant, that is to say,
Rahul Kumar Sharma. It is virtually a
second chapter, if the prosecution case is
accepted as one worth trial, to Case Crime
No. 223 of 2019.

2. The proceedings arising out of
Case Crime No. 223 of 2019 were
challenged before this Court, through an
application under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 19732, being
Application under Section 482 No. - 737 of
2020, decided by a judgment and order of
date.

3. The facts giving rise to the last
mentioned crime have been detailed in my
judgment and order of date rendered in
Application under Section 482 No. 737 of
2020. For felicity of reference, the facts
relating to Case Crime No. 223 of 2019, as
detailed in Application under Section 482
of the Code last mentioned, may be
extracted :

This prosecution commenced on
a First Information Report3 lodged by the
deceased's brother, Rahul Kumar Sharma,
on 28.07.2019, about the suicidal death of
his brother on 25th of July, 2019. The FIR
nominates
the
deceased's
in
laws,
numbering seven, including his wife Smt.
Menka alias Monty, his mother-in-law Smt.
Kusum Lata, his three sisters-in-law, to wit,
Indu Sharma, Chhaya Sharma and Romika
Sharma, besides his brother-in-law Rajat
Sharma. Another person nominated is one
Rajendra Chaudhary, said to be an uncle of
sorts to the deceased's in-laws. The
applicant is not named in the FIR. The
substance of the information, read to the
police, says that the named in-laws of the
deceased were frequently troubling him and
he was in distress. Rajendra Chaudhary had
repeatedly threatened the deceased to death
and demanded money of him. The deceased
had shared the last mentioned fact with the
informant, but his in-laws would not give
up on their wayward conduct and Rajendra
Chaudhary and the other in-laws would
repeatedly demand money of the deceased.
It is reported that distressed over this issue,
on 25.07.2019, at 12 O' Clock, the deceased
jumped off the bridge built over the Ganga
Garage and into the river, committing
suicide. It is also said that he had left home,
riding the informant's motorcycle, which
was found, and a suicide note in the
deceased handwriting was found at the
informant's Dharm Kanta, wherein he had
claimed his wife and in-laws' harassment as
the cause driving him to commit suicide. It
is said in the closing lines of the FIR that
the deceased did commit suicide because of
the harassment that his wife and in-laws
inflicted on him.

4. Close on heels of the FIR lodged by
deceased Mohit Sharma's brother about a case
of abetment to suicide against the former's inlaws, the other brother of the late Mohit
Sharma, Sudhir Kumar Sharma, lodged an FIR,
giving rise to this crime, also against Mohit's inlaws, numbering seven, and two unknown
offenders. The applicant, like the other FIR
relating to abetment to suicide, is not named as
one of the accused. The FIR opens the
prosecution narrative, linking it to the crime,
when Mohit Sharma's family had gone to the
Ganga Barrage to cremate his mortal remains. It
says that on 29.07.2019, when the informant of
the present case and other members of the
deceased's family were away to the cremation
7 All. Chitra @ Bebi Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
779
ground, at about half past twelve, apparently in
the afternoon, the deceased's brother-in-law,
Rajat Sharma, son of late Brij Bhushan Sharma,
mother-in-law Kusum Lata, widow of late Brij
Bhushan Sharma, sisters-in-law Indu Sharma,
Romila Sharma and Chhaya Sharma, all
daughters of late Brij Bhushan Sharma, and
Romila's husband, Amit Sharma, son of Ishwar
Swarup, besides Rajendra Singh Chaudhary,
son of Hari Singh, together with two unknown
men, arrived on board three cars (a Spark
bearing Registration No. UP 12 W 1011, a
Grand Sports bearing Registration No. UP 12
AK 4545 and an another car) at the informant's
house. Menaka, the wife of the informant's
deceased brother, was also accompanying the
visitors. The incoming party assaulted the
informant's sister Indu, his niece Swarna
Sharma, together with other members of his
family. Upon the informant's sister Indu
protesting the assault, the accused are claimed
to have strangulated her, with an intention to do
her to death. It is further said that the assailants
relieved the womenfolk of their ornaments (the
description whereof is : 1-4 gold bracelets, 2-3
gold rings, 3-1 silver rakhi, 4-3 pairs of
bichchwa, 5-1 gold dolna, 6-2 pairs of gold
tops) besides other valuables, all of which they
looted. It is further said that the raiding party
took away Mohit Sharma's i-10 car, bearing
Registration No. UP 12 AH 8305, the keys
whereof were with Mohit's wife Menaka. It is
also said that the accused kidnapped Abhiraj
alias Manan Sharma, the late Mohit Sharma's
three-year old son. Towards the tail end of the
FIR, it is alleged that while making good their
escape, the accused threatened the victims with
death. There is almost a postscript mention of
the fact that the accused while escaping, when
attempted to be restrained by one Prabhat
Sharma, son of Jai Bhagwan Sharma and
Shailendra Sharma, son of Jagdish Lal Sharma,
they threatened these two also with death, and
drove away in their cars.

5. The Police investigated the matter
and filed a charge-sheet dated 15.11.2019, on
the basis whereof, the Magistrate has taken
cognizance on 21.11.2019, giving rise to the
impugned proceedings.

6. Heard Mr. V.M. Zaidi, learned Senior
Counsel assisted by Mr. Imran Khan, learned
Counsel for the appellant, Mr. Amit Daga,
learned Counsel appearing on behalf of
opposite party no. 2 and Mr. Deepak Mishra,
learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the
State.

7. It is urged by Mr. Zaidi, the learned
Senior
Advocate
appearing
for
the
applicant, that the impugned prosecution is
a patent abuse of process of law, designed
to achieve more than one extraneous
purpose. It has been brought to overawe the
deceased Mohit Sharma's wife Menaka and
her family members, with an oppressive
barrage of criminal prosecution, so that the
deceased's wife gives up all that she is
entitled to under the law, by virtue of being
Mohit's widow. It is urged that the foremost
purpose is to coerce Smt. Menaka to forgo
all her rights that she inherits under the law
by virtue of being Mohit's widow, and to
coerce her into giving up custody of her
minor son. It is emphasized by Mr. Zaidi
that this prosecution to its best, is one based
on incredible allegations. It is particularly
pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel
that so far as the applicant is concerned, her
name does not find mention in the FIR. If it
were an occurrence with a grain of truth to
it, or the applicant indeed involved in the
battery, attributed to the various in-laws of
Mohit Sharma, there is no reason why the
applicant's name would not figure in the
FIR, where no one else has been spared.
Learned Senior Counsel submits that it is
not a case where the identity of the
780 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
offender may be in doubt. After all, the
accused, including the applicant and the
informant, are related by marriage, and
very familiar with one another.

8. The omission of the applicant's
name in the FIR without a whisper,
according to the learned Senior Counsel,
ex-facie excludes her culpability. It is
emphasized by the learned Senior Counsel
that
the
applicant's
name
has
been
introduced on the basis of design and
afterthought mala fide, about a month after
the case was registered. It is also
emphasized that whatever has figured in
the statement of witnesses, the applicant
has not been credited with any specific
role, except general allegations of being
part of the unlawful assembly comprising
the widow and the in-laws of the late Mohit
Sharma. It is also argued that the
Investigating Officer in the case has not at
all been fair and forthright; rather he has
done a biased and one-sided investigation,
where the impugned charge-sheet would be
a nullity. It is said by way of emphasis that
the impugned proceedings are a patent
abuse of process of Court, besides being
ex-facie mala fide. There is no material
collected worth trial; and whatever material
is there, in the circumstances, discloses no
more than an incredible story, which no
reasonable person can be expected to
believe.

9. A counter affidavit each has been
put in put in on behalf of State as well as
opposite party no. 2. The learned A.G.A.
appearing for the State and Mr. Amit Daga,
learned
Counsel
appearing
for
the
complainant, have spoken in one voice to
say that a triable case is disclosed against
the applicant. They have referred to the fact
that there are three independent witnesses,
who have supported the prosecution in their
statements under Section 161 of the Code,
besides the recovery of two gold bracelets
from the possession of co-accused Rajat
Sharma and Rajendra Chaudhary, who are
said to have been apprehended while
travelling in their car, bearing Registration
No. UP 12 AK 4545. It is also urged that
two amongst the victims of the assault, that
is to say, Indu Sharma and Swarna Sharma
have sustained injuries, that are evident
from the medico-legal reports that are part
of the police papers. In the submission of
learned Counsel appearing for opposite
parties, therefore, it is a case where it
cannot be urged that there is no material to
proceed against the accused, or one where
the investigation is so palpably unfair that a
trial ought not be permitted.

10. This Court has considered the rival
submissions and perused the material on
record. If one were to look into the sequence
of events, the prosecution against the
applicant appears to be indeed both mala fide
and incredible. The FIR giving rise to the
impugned proceedings has been lodged close
on heels of the earlier FIR, reporting a case of
abetment to suicide against the applicant and
the other co-accused, where the informant's
other brother had reported them to the Police.
It was a case where the man who took his life
was the applicant's brother-in-law - her
sister's husband, in consequence of what is
made out to be a prolonged, oppressive and
torturesome treatment by the deceased's wife
and in-laws, including the applicant. Here,
the informant alleges that on the deceased's
family returning home from the cremation
ground, the applicant, along with the
deceased's wife, her sisters, brothers and
mother came over to the deceased's home,
assaulted the entire family and robbed them.

11. The incident appears to be relatable to
a time when the bereaved family would expect
7 All. Chitra @ Bebi Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
781
visitors come over to offer their condolences.
Assuming that the background of the deceased
Mohit Sharma's demise may not have led his
in-laws to visit the family and condole the
mutual loss, but to believe a bereaved family
being raided by the deceased's wife, mother-inlaw, sisters-in-law and brothers-in-law, only to
be beaten up and looted by them, appears to be
fantastic and incredible. The manner of
commission of the crime smacks of a patently
mala fide by implication by the informant. The
informant and his family appear to be badly
aggrieved on account of the suicidal death of
their brother, alleging an abetement led by his
wife and in-laws. They did report the wife and
the Police for that abetment and in connection
with that crime, the applicant too is facing trial.

12. The present prosecution, however,
appears to be one that is fuelled by vengeance.
The deceased's family have taken resort to abuse
of process of court, to settle scores. The tangible
evidence referred to by the complainant-opposite
party and the State is about recovery of two
bracelets, said to be robbed in the assault from one
or the other women of the deceased's family.
These are said to have been recovered from coaccused Rajendra Chaudhary, and not from the
applicant. At the time of this recovery, those two
co-accused were riding their car and not the car
claimed to be looted from the deceased family.
Quite apart, movables like jewellery and a car, that
are said to have been looted, are invariably
property held jointly by the husband and wife, that
is kept parked at the husband's place, or the parties'
matrimonial home. Jewellery is invariably part of
the wife's stree dhan. There could be a situation
where the wife took away her jewellery back to
her parents' place after her estranged husband's
death, or likewise, took along the car that the
couple were using, but the passage of this property
from the deceased's family to his wife, even if it be
true for a fact, would not remotely be referable to
robbery.

13. This Court cannot ignore the fact
that the present crime is one of assault and
robbery, where the offending party were all inlaws of the informant's deceased brother. It is
hard to believe, considering the relationship
between parties, that the applicant would not be
named in a crime of this nature, in the FIR. It
would be impossible to miss naming her in the
FIR, even if there were an iota of truth to the
prosecution. The introduction of the applicant's
name at a later stage through statements under
Section 161 of the Code, in the clear opinion of
this Court, is a red-marker that predicates a
mala fide implication for the applicant. The
injuries that have been sustained by two of the
family members of the deceased have already
been found to be simple in nature. No doubt,
one or the other injury sustained by Indu
Sharma and Swarna Sharma are sited around
the neck, but both the injuries are simple in
nature, where, for various reasons already
indicated, it is difficult to connect these to acts
of the applicant.

14. So far as the charge under Section
364 IPC is concerned, that part of the
prosecution is based on the allegation about
the minor son of deceased Mohit and the
applicant's sister, Menaka being kidnapped
by the deceased's in-laws, including the
minor's mother. It would, indeed, appear to
be very incredible that the applicant, the
other co-accused along with the minor's
mother would kidnap the latter's son from
her deceased husband's family. The minor
is said to be staying all along with the
mother, that is to say, the applicant's sister.
In any case, the applicant's involvement in
the entire episode appears no more than a
device to add to the sting of a mala fide
prosecution. To this Court's understanding,
there is indeed no tangible material, on an
overall view of the matter, that may
warrant the applicant to be tried.
782 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

15. The Supreme Court in Sanjay
Kumar Rai v. State of Uttar Pradesh &
Another4
has
laid
down
guiding
principles, recounting earlier authority
about the legitimate use of power of
discharge by the trial court, and the scope
of the High Courts' power, while revising
an order refusing discharge under Section
397 of the Code. Their Lordships, while
discouraging compartmentalization of the
High Courts' power under Section 397 and
its power to scrutinize an order refusing
discharge, if it is a case of patent abuse of
process of law, held :

16. The correct position of law as
laid down in Madhu Limaye(supra), thus, is
that orders framing charges or refusing
discharge are neither interlocutory nor final
in nature and are therefore not affected by
the bar of Section 397 (2) of CrPC. That
apart, this Court in the above-cited cases
has unequivocally acknowledged that the
High Court is imbued with inherent
jurisdiction to prevent abuse of process or
to secure ends of justice having regard to
the facts and circumstance of individual
cases. As a caveat it may be stated that the
High Court, while exercising its aforestated jurisdiction ought to be circumspect.
The discretion vested in the High Court is
to be invoked carefully and judiciously for
effective and timely administration of
criminal justice system. This Court,
nonetheless, does not recommend a
complete hands off approach. Albeit,
there should be interference, may be, in
exceptional cases, failing which there is
likelihood of serious prejudice to the
rights of a citizen. For example, when the
contents of a complaint or the other
purported material on record is a brazen
attempt to persecute an innocent person,
it becomes imperative upon the Court to
prevent
the
abuse
of
process
of
law.(emphasis by Court)

16. The guidance of their Lordships of the
Supreme Court unequivocally endorses the
principle that an absurd and incredible
prosecution, that is virtually persecution of an
innocent person, ought to be undone by the
High Court in whatever proceedings, a patent
abuse of process of comes to its notice. Here, as
said above, this Court has no manner of doubt
that the impugned prosecution giving rise to
these proceedings against the applicant, is a
patent abuse of process of court, founded on
incredible allegations.

17. In the result, this application succeeds
and is allowed. The proceedings of Case No.
1983/9 of 2019 (arsing out of Case Crime No.
224 of 2019), under Sections 395, 323, 307,
364, 506, 147, 149 IPC, Police Station -
Meerapur, District - Muzaffarnagar, pending
before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Court No. 3, are hereby quashed, as against the
applicant.

18. Let this order be communicated to the
Magistrate concerned through the learned
Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar by the Registrar
(Compliance).
----------
(2021)07ILR A782
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 16.07.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J.

Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 737 of 2020

Chitra @ Bebi ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties