SANGEETA AGRAWAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

462               SUPREME[2018]
                          COURT 14REPORTS
                                  S.C.R. 462             [2018] 14 S.C.R.


A                      SANGEETA AGRAWAL & ORS.
                                       v.
                   STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.
                      (Criminal Appeal No. 1543 of 2018)
B                           DECEMBER 03, 2018
      [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE AND INDU MALHOTRA, JJ.]
             Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s.482 – Quashing of
      proceedings – Complaint filed under ss.498A, 304B IPC –
      Application for quashing the proceedings filed under s.482 dismissed
C
      by the High Court – On appeal, held: High Court did not mention
      the bare facts of the case with a view to appreciate the factual
      controversy – High Court ought to have first set out the brief facts
      of the case with a view to understand the factual matrix of the case
      and then examined the challenge made to the proceedings and then
D     recorded his finding as to on what basis and reasons, a case is
      made out for any interference or not – Matter remitted to High Court
      for consideration afresh – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.498A and 304B.
            Allowing the appeal and remanding the matter to High
      court, the Court
E            HELD : The Single Judge ought to have first set out the
      brief facts of the case with a view to understand the factual matrix
      of the case and then examined the challenge made to the
      proceedings in the light of the principles of law laid down by this
      Court and then recorded his finding as to on what basis and
F     reasons, a case is made out for any interference or not. This is
      the least that is required in every order to support the conclusion
      reached for disposal of the case. It enables the Higher Court to
      examine the question as to whether the reasoning given by the
      Court below is factually and legally sustainable. This exercise
      was not done by the High Court while passing the impugned order
G     and hence interference is called for. [Paras 10, 11 and 12]
      [464-D-F]




H
                                      462
      SANGEETA AGRAWAL & ORS. v. STATE OF UTTAR                                463
                  PRADESH & ANR.

       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal                       A
No. 1543 of 2018.
       From the Judgment and Orders dated 12.09.2018 of the High
Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Application u/s 482 No. 31729 of
2018.
       Praveen Swarup, Ms. Chitra Chaudhary, Shashank Singh,                   B
Prashant Chaudhary, Advs. for the Appellants.
       The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
       ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J.
       1. Leave granted.
       2. This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated      C
12.09.2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in an
Application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”) bearing No.31729 of 2018
whereby the Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the application
filed by the appellants herein.                                                D
       3. Few facts need mention infra to appreciate the short
controversy involved in this appeal.
       4. By impugned order, the Single Judge of the High Court dismissed
the appellants’ application filed under Section 482 of the Code wherein
the challenge was to quash the Charge Sheet dated 12.06.2018 as well           E
as the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.2767 of 2018 (State vs.
Arvind & Ors.) arising out of Case Crime No.79 of 2018 under Sections
498A, 304B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as
“IPC”) and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 Police Station
Dhampur, District Bijnor, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Bijnor.                                                                        F
       5. The short question, which arises for consideration in this appeal,
is whether the High Court was justified in dismissing the appellants’
application filed under Section 482 of the Code.
       6. Heard Mr. Praveen Swarup, learned counsel for the appellants.
None appeared for the respondents.                                             G
       7. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellants and on
perusal of the record of the case, we are inclined to set aside the impugned
order and remand the case to the High Court for deciding the appellants’
application, out of which this appeal arises, afresh on merits in accordance
with law after notice to other side.                                           H
464                 SUPREME COURT REPORTS                      [2018] 14 S.C.R.


A            8. On perusal of the impugned order, we find that the Single Judge
      has only quoted the principles of law laid down by this Court in several
      decisions relating to powers of the High Court to interfere in the cases
      filed under Section 482 of the Code from Para 2 to the concluding para
      but has failed to even refer to the facts of the case with a view to
      appreciate the factual controversy, such as, what is the nature of the
B
      complaint/FIR filed against the appellants, the allegations on which it is
      filed, who filed it, the grounds on which the complaint/FIR/proceedings
      is challenged by the appellants, why such grounds are not made out
      under Section 482 of the Code etc.
            9. We are, therefore, at a loss to know the factual matrix of the
C     case much less to appreciate except to read the legal principles laid
      down by this Court in several decisions.
         10. In our view, the Single Judge ought to have first set out the
  brief facts of the case with a view to understand the factual matrix of
  the case and then examined the challenge made to the proceedings in
D the light of the principles of law laid down by this Court and then recorded
  his finding as to on what basis and reasons, a case is made out for any
  interference or not.
             11. In our view, this is the least that is required in every order to
      support the conclusion reached for disposal of the case. It enables the
E     Higher Court to examine the question as to whether the reasoning given
      by the Court below is factually and legally sustainable.
             12. We find that the aforementioned exercise was not done by the
      High Court while passing the impugned order and hence interference is
      called for.
F
         13. We, therefore, find ourselves unable to concur with such disposal
  of the application by the High Court and feel inclined to set aside the
  impugned order and remand the case to the High Court (Single Judge)
  with a request to decide the application afresh on merits in accordance
  with law keeping in view aforementioned observations after issuing notice
G to respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
            14. Having formed an opinion to remand the case in the light of
      our reasoning, we do not consider it proper to go into the merits of the
      case.

H
       SANGEETA AGRAWAL & ORS. v. STATE OF UTTAR                               465
       PRADESH & ANR. [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J.]

       15. In view of the foregoing discussion, the appeal succeeds and        A
is accordingly allowed. Impugned order is set aside. The case is remanded
to the High Court for its decision on merits uninfluenced by any of our
observations in this order after notice to respondents.

Devika Gujral                                 Matter remanded to High Court.
                                                                               B




                                                                               C




                                                                               D




                                                                               E




                                                                               F




                                                                               G




                                                                               H