Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 1 November, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.21964 of 2014

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2509 Year- 2012 Thana -WEST CHAMPARAN
COMPLAINT District- WESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH)

Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad Son of Late Sharfuddin Resident of Village-Meghwal,
Mathia, P.S.- Ram Nagar, District-West Champaran …. …. Petitioner
Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Soharab Ansari Son of Late Farooque Ansari

3. Sufia Khatoon @ Sufia Soharab, Daughter of Soharab Ansarai Both are resident
of Village-Bholapur, Kharhat, P.S.-Bhairoganj, (Bagha), District-West
Champaran …. …. Opposite Parties

Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Iqbal Asif Niazi, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Amrendra Prasad, APP

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 01-11-2017

Counsel for the parties are present in the Court.
The petitioner prays for quashing of order dated 29.1.2013,
passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah in
Complaint case no. 2509C/2012, whereby the learned court has taken
cognizance of offence under sections 498A and 406 IPC and section
4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that in the instant case the
complaint has been lodged mala fide. He submits that prior to the
institution of the complaint on 5.11.2012, written Talaknama dated
13.2.2009 (Annexure 3) has been executed between the parties on
intervention of their well wishers. He further submits that Annexure
4 is order of the Darul Ifta Imarat Sharia (Bihar, Orissa Jharkhand)
Phulwarisharif, Patna regarding divorce between the parties.

I find that in paragraph 15 of the quashing application, the
petitioner has placed on record details of Divorce case no. 199 of
2012, filed in the court of the Principal Judge, Family Court, West
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21964 of 2014 dt.01-11-2017

2/2

Champaran at Bettiah on 16.6.2012 for adjudicating a decree of
confirming divorce pronounced by the petitioner on 12.2.2009.

The issue of divorce remains undecided due to pendency of
the said case. The factual denial advanced on behalf of the petitioner
cannot be looked into by this Court exercising jurisdiction under
section 482 of the Cr. P. C. I do not find it appropriate to interfere
with the cognizance order dated 29.1.2013 while hearing the matter
under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The quashing
application stands dismissed.

The petitioner prays for and is granted liberty to raise the
issues at appropriate stage which may be considered by the court
below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by dismissal
of this case.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J)

Shashi.

NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 6.11.2017
Transmission 6.11.2017
Date

Leave a Comment

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