Rajneesh Kumar Gupta vs The State Of Bihar on 28 July, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.34429 of 2014
Arising Out of P.S.Case No. -225 Year- 2011 Thana -BEGUSARAI TOWN District- BEGUSARAI

Rajneesh Kumar Gupta son of Raj Kumar Gupta , resident of Quarter No. 116
. Road No. 8 , Sri Krishna Nagar , P.S. -Budha Colony , District – Patna .

…. …. Petitioner
Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Sangita Kumari, daughter of Late Arun Prasad, resident of village-Miyachak
(Marwari Mohalla), P.S. Nagar Begusasrai, District-Begusarai.

…. …. Opposite Parties

Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Shakir Ahmad, APP

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 28-07-2017

Heard.

2. The petitioner has filed this application under Section 482 of the

Cr.P.C. for quashing the entire proceeding of G.R.No.1767 of 2011 arising out of

Begusarai P.S.Case No.225 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 498A, 341,

323, 504/34 of the IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act as well as

the order dated 21.06.2014 passed by SDJM, Begusarai whereunder his prayer of

discharge filed under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C. has been rejected.

3. On going through the impugned order and annexures attached

with this application, I find that this petitioner is full brother of the husband of the

informant against whom she has alleged that her husband and other in-laws

including the petitioner used to demand Rs. two lacks as further dowry for

starting business by her husband besides television and refrigerator. The accuseds

snatched her belongings including ornaments and ousted her from the

READ  Narendra Singh & Anr vs State Of M.P on 12 April, 2004

matrimonial house. The matter was investigated and police submitted
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34429 of 2014 dt.28-07-2017

2/2

chargesheet. The court below took cognizance against the petitioner and other co-

accused. The learned Magistrate finding sufficient material in case diary as well

has rejected the prayer of the petitioner filed under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C as

per detailed order.

4. Considering the facts stated above, I do not find any merit in the

criminal miscellaneous application. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

(Sanjay Kumar, J)

B.Kr./-

AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 01.08.2017
Transmission 01.08.2017
Date

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *