IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.28716 of 2012
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2993 Year- 2011 Thana -null District- BEGUSARAI
1. Sushanta Kumar Ghosh S/O Late Ashwani Kumar Ghosh Resident Of 174 B,
Birla Colony, P.S.- Phulwarisarif Town And District- Patna
2. Smt. Sheela (Sarkar) Ghosh W/O Sushanta Kumar Ghosh Resident Of 174 B,
Birla Colony, P.S.- Phulwarisarif Town And District- Patna
3. Sharmishtha Ghosh D/O Sushanta Kumar Ghosh Resident Of 174 B, Birla
Colony, P.S.- Phulwarisarif Town And District- Patna
4. Devbrat Ghosh S/O Sushanta Kumar Ghosh Resident Of 174 B, Birla Colony,
P.S.- Phulwarisarif Town And District- Patna
…. …. Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Amar Biswas S/O Late B.K. Biswas Guidance Centre, 303, C.R. Complex, 4th
Floor, R.K. Bhattacharya Road, P.S.- Gandhi Maidan, Town And District- Patna
…. …. Opposite Party/s
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Sharma, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: ….-10-2017
1. This petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated
27-04-2012 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-Ist Class, Patna in Complaint
Case No. 2993C of 2011 by which and whereunder, the learned Magistrate has
found prima facie case against the petitioners under Sections-344, 504/34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
2. It is alleged in the complaint that the petitioner Nos. 1 2
approached the complainant for marriage of their daughter Sharmistha Ghosh
(petitioner No. 3) with Biswajit, the nephew of the complainant. The marriage
however was settled with Mitali, the younger sister of petitioner No. 3 for certain
reasons and engagement was done on 28-07-2008.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28716 of 2012 dt 18-10-2017
Page 2 of 5
3. The complainant was under monetary constraints and therefore, he
requested petitioner Nos. 1 2 to defer the marriage for one year. The petitioner
No. 1 insisted to perform the marriage earliest and forced the complainant to
accept the loan of Rs. 1,71,000/- for that purpose. The marriage was solemnized
on 22-11-2008 at the house of petitioner Nos. 1 2. It was decided that some of
the loan amount would be adjusted by petitioner Nos. 1 2 against the purchase
of gifts to be given to Biswajit and Mitali and if some money is left, same would
be returned in installments. The complainant returned Rs. 72,000/- in five
installments as mentioned in the complaint petition. It is further alleged that from
the very beginning of the marriage, petitioner No. 3 who is very ill temper and ill
manner, started creating differences for not marrying her with Biswjit. No family
member of Mitali sent any good wishes either in the birthday of Biswajit or in the
first marriage anniversary of Mitali for which, Mitali was very upset. Mitali
became pregnant and she was regularly taken to Tripolia Hospital for check up
between September 2010 and January 2011. It is alleged that on 19-01-2011,
petitioner Nos. 1 2 came to the complainant and requested him to allow them to
take Mitali with them till delivery. The complainant allowed them to take Mitali
with them and they also made request to take the ornaments because no body will
remain in home during working hours. The accused persons took Mitali with them
along with ornaments. On 27-04-2011, Mitali gave birth to male child by
caesarean for which the complainant signed the bond. The accused persons
requested to take Mitali with them for her further treatment. They took away all
the bills and prescriptions along with Mitali which they would require to show the
doctor. During her stay at her parents’ house, Mitali always remained in contact
with Biswajit and the complainant on mobile phone provided to her by the
complainant. Mitali informed Biswajit that Sharmishtha is making her life
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28716 of 2012 dt 18-10-2017
Page 3 of 5
miserable, insults her, calls name to Biswajit and the complainant and on protest,
she becomes violent and other members of the family support her. She requested
Biswajit to take her with him. Biswajit went to bring Mitali and his son back but
Mitali was not allowed to come and Biswajit and his friend, who had
accompanied him, were insulted and abused by Sharmishtha and her mother. The
complainant thereafter talked to petitioner No. 1 and informed that he wants to
bring back Mitali and her son. Sharmishtha came along with accused persons in
the house of complainant on the next day and informed that they would not allow
Mitali to lead happy conjugal life. The complainant received legal notice from
Sushanto to return the money to him which was allegedly taken by him as loan.
The complainant replied to the notice stating therein that he had taken
accommodation loan of Rs. 1,71,000/- and how the same was adjusted.
Thereafter, Arvind Kumar Singh rang up the complainant and asked for Rs.
50,000/- to settle the dispute. He also gave threat that in the event, the money is
not paid, then the whole family of the complainant would be implicated in the
false case. The complainant refused to pay the amount. The complainant and
Biswajit again on 16-10-2011 went to bring Mitali but on that date, accused
persons assaulted abused and drove out the complainant and Biswajit out of the
house and threatened that they would be dragged in false criminal cases.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP and the
counsel appearing for Opposite Party No. 2.
5. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner No. 1 has
filed complaint case bearing Complaint Case No. 673 C of 2011 on 28-07-2011
against the present complainant and four others namely, Biswajit Biswas, Apurva
Ghosh, Rajshree Ghosh and Jay Shree Biswas and in that case, after inquiry,
prima facie case was found under Section-498A of the Indian Penal Code against
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28716 of 2012 dt 18-10-2017
Page 4 of 5
the complainant Amar Biswas, Biswajit Biswas, Apurva Ghosh, Rajshree Ghosh
and Jay Shree Biswas on 11-06-2012. The petitioner No. 1 also filed informatory
petition on 17-10-2011 stating therein that the present complainant and his family
members are threatening to withdraw the complaint case filed by petitioner No. 1
otherwise he will be involved in false case.
6. The present complaint case filed against the petitioners is nothing
but a counter blast of Complaint Case No. 673C of 2011. The complainant has
filed the instant false and concocted complaint case to save himself as well as his
family members’ skin. No such occurrence has taken place as alleged in the
complaint petition.
7. Counsel for opposite party No. 2 and learned APP have submitted
that the learned court below after holding inquiry found prima facie case against
these petitioners for the offence under Sections-344, 504/34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
8. Having heard both the parties, this court finds that prior to filing of
the instant complaint by the complainant on 09-11-2011, the petitioner No. 1 had
filed Complaint Case No. 673C of 2011 against the complainant and others and in
that case, learned Magistrate has found prima facie case against the complainant
and others for the offence under Section-498A of the Indian Penal Code.
9. In the instant case, general and omnibus allegation has been
levelled against the petitioners by the complainant that when Biswajit went to
bring his wife Mitali, the accused persons (petitioners) did not allow to bring her
and these accused persons assaulted Biswajit and his friends who have gone to
bring Mitali.
10. This court finds that the instant case is counter blast of Complaint
Case No. 673C of 2011 filed by petitioner No. 1 against the complainant Amar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28716 of 2012 dt 18-10-2017
Page 5 of 5
Bishwas, his nephew Biswajit and other accused persons named in the complaint
petition, in which, the court below has after holding inquiry found prima facie
case against all the accused persons for the offence under Section-498A of the
Indian Penal Code.
11. As such, the instant case has been filed by the complainant
maliciously with ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the petitioners and
with a view to spite them due to personal grudge on account of earlier Complaint
Case No. 673C of 2011 filed by petitioner No. 1 against the complainant and
others.
12. Therefore, the continuance of criminal proceeding against the
petitioners is an abuse of the process of the court and harassment to the
petitioners.
13. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 27-04-2012 passed by
learned Judicial Magistrate-Ist Class, Patna in Complaint Case No. 2993C along
with entire criminal proceeding is hereby quashed with respect to these
petitioners.
14. Accordingly, this Cr. Misc. Application is allowed.
(Sanjay Priya, J)
A.K.V./-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE 07-09-2017
Uploading Date 19-10-2017
Transmission 19-10-2017
Date