PETETIONERS HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Cr.M.P. No. 61 l 201 1 Smt, Mamta Agrawal W/o Shri Rakesh Agrawal, ag€d about 36 yéars, R/o N€w Smt. Shobha Agrawal W/o Sh11' Kamlésh Agrawal, aged about 34 years, R/o Gram Panchayat Kharora, DiStrict Raipur (C.G.). Stat€ of Chhattisgarh, through District Magistrate, Raipur (C.G.}. PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Khursipar, Bhilai,” Dishict Durg (C. G.). W RESPoNDENT (SB :Hon’ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present- Shri S. Im’tiaz Ali, Advocate for the petiiioners. ORAL- ORDER (Passed on 09/02/2011) 1. By this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19737(in short ‘the Code’) petitioners have prayed for quashment of the criminal proceeding against the petitioners pending before the Judicial Magistrate FirSt Class, Bhatapaia in criminal cage NO 463/ 2009. 2. As per copy of the charge sheet filed on behalf of the petitioners, present petitioners are SiSter—in—law (Nanand of Meena Agrawal). As per First Information Report her marriage was performed with Prakash Agrawal on 5/5/ 2005 and since 5/5/05 present applicants, her father—in-law and mother-in—law and brotlier—in'law have committed torture and cruelty upon her in connection with demand of dowry and one occasion her brother— in—law poured kerosene oil over her and has tried to set her ablaze. She has aleo filed written application on 5/8] 2009. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that present petitioners are married sister—indaw residing separately in their matrimonial house h Shri Rakesh Kumar Jha, Dy. G.A. for the State] respondent. @ sinC6—2003 there was no occasion to commit any offenm with ' complainant and only on tha ground of relation they have bean falsely implicated. 4. Scope of Section 482 of the Code is very limited. In all cases of illegality or irregularity High Court is not required to exercise its inherent jurisdiction. It should be used sparingly in an exceptional circumstances, while dealing with exercise of power under Section 482 of the Code in the matter of Mls. Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and others v. Md. Sharaful Haque and othersl the Supreme Court has held thus:— “8i Exercise ofpower under Section 482 of the Code in a case of this nature is the exception and not the ruler The Section does not con er any new powers on the High Court. It only saves the inherent power which the Court possessed before the enactment of the Code It envisages three circumstances under which the inherent jurisdiction may be exercised} namely, (i) to giue ejfect to an order under the Code, (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of court, and (iii) to otherwise secure the ends of justice It is neither possible nor desirabte to lay down any inflexible rule which would got/em the exercise of inherentjurisdiction. No legislative enactment dealing with procedure can provide for all cases that may possibly arise. Courts, therefore) have inherent powers apart from ewress provisions of law which are necessary for proper discharge of junctions and duties imposed upon them by iaw. That is the doctrine which finds expression in the section which merely recognizes and preserves inherent powers of the High Courts. All courts, whether civil or criminal possess, in the absence of any express provision, as inherent in their constitution, all such powers as are necessary to do the rg'ht and to undo a wrong in course of administration ofjustice on the e principle “quando lex aliquid alicui concedit, ooncedere videtur et id sine quo res ipsae esse non potest" (when the law gives a person anything it gives him that without which it cannot exist). While exercising powers under the section, the court does not jimetion as a .x .k _ ‘AIR 2005 SC 9 a Consequently, petition is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed in limine. 6. Interim applications I.A. No. 01 8s 02 are also dismissed. l ; Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge