B.R. Arora, J. - (1.) THIS miscellaneous petition is directed against the order dated March 6, 1990, passed by the Additional Civil Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur, by which the learned Magistrate took cognizance against the petitioner Under Section 498 I.P.C.
(2.) SMT . Parveen filed a complaint against Abdul Sakoor, Mst. Jubeda, Abdul Kayoom, Abdul Aziz and Mst. Amlurahim in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur, Under Sections 323,406,420,120B and 498A I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Prohibition of Dowry Act. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur, sent this complaint to the Police Station, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur, for investigation, Under Section 156 Cr.P.C. The police, after necessary investigation, presented the challan only against Abdul Sakoor Under Section 4981.P.C. and regarding the others, the police was of the opinion that no case is made -out against them. The complainant filed a protest petition and after hearing the arguments on the protest petition, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance against Jubeda, also, Under Section 493 I.P.C. It is against this order that the present petition Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the order passed by the learned lower Court and the record of the case shown by the learned Counsel for the parties.
(3.) AT the time of taking the cognizance of the witnesses and the suspected conditions of the offence to satisfy itself that a prima facie case is made -out to proceed -with against the present accused. At this stage, the evidence is not to be meticulously examined as required to be examined at the final stage. If there is prima facie evidence to proceed -with, then the Court can take cognizance and proceed -with the matter. If the accused, against whom the cognizance has been taken, has any valid defence available to her, then she can agitate that point before the trial Court and the trial Court will decide her objections if so raised at the appropriate stage. But the power Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be lightly used in quashing a proceeding when a prima facie case has been made -out against the petitioner. It has been held by the Supreme Court in the case of The State of Haryana v. Choudhary Bhajan Lal (Judgments Today, JT 1990 ((4) P&H 650)): We also give a notice of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the Court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the F.I.R. or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act according to its whim or caprice.;