IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.44850 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -655 Year- 2013 Thana -PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
PATNA
1. Sheorati Devi, W/o Sunil Rabbani
2. Shambhu Rabbani @ Shambhu Kumar
3. Sabera Kumari
Both Son and daughter of Sunil Rabbani R/o village- Nayatola Simri, P.S. and
P.O.- Bakhtiyarpur and District- Patna.
…. …. Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Vibha Devi W/o Akhlesh Rabani and Daughter of Ram Chritra Ram resident of
village- Mode, P.S.- Mokamah and Distt.- Patna
…. …. Opposite Party/s
with
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1648 of 2015
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -655 Year- 2013 Thana -PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
PATNA
Akhilesh Rabbani, Son of Bhikhari Mahto, Resident of Village – Naya Tola Simri,
P.S and P.O- Bakhtiyarpur and District – Patna.
…. …. Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Vibha Devi Wife of Akhlesh Rabani and daughter of Ram Chritra Ram Resident
of village- Mode, P.S- Mokamah and District – Patna
…. …. Opposite Party/s
Appearance :
(In Cr.Misc. No.44850 of 2014)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Abu Haidar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party no.1: Mr.Tapeshwar Sharma, APP.
(In Cr.Misc. No.1648 of 2015)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Abu Haidar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party no.1 : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwray-1, APP
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 10-10-2017
Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the outset,
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44850 of 2014 dt.10-10-2017 2
submits that the parties have now settled their dispute and wife and
husband are living together.
The petitioners are seeking quashing of the order dated
17.01.2017 passed by learned S.D.J.M., Barh in Complaint Case
No.655(C) of 2013 by which the learned S.D.J.M. has taken
cognizance of the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal
Code and issued summons against the petitioners.
Learned counsel submits that in Cr.Misc.No.44850 of
2014 the petitioner no.1 is the mother-in-law, petitioner no.2 is the
Devar and petitioner no.3 is Nanad of the opposite party no.2,
whereas in Cr.Misc. No.1648 of 2015 the petitioner is the husband of
the opposite party no.2.
Since the quashing of the criminal proceeding has been
sought at this stage on the ground of a compromise and settlement
between the wife and husband and it is stated that the matrimonial
peace has already been taken place, in absence of the opposite party
no.2 instead of interfering with the order taking cognizance, this Court
is of the opinion that let the learned Magistrate fix the complaint case
for evidence before charge if the parties have already appeared and
take up the matter on day-to-day basis where the parties shall
cooperate in final disposal of the complaint case itself.
Both the applications are disposed off with the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44850 of 2014 dt.10-10-2017 3
observations and directions made above.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
Arvind/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 12.10.2017
Transmission 12.10.2017
Date