Nitish Kumar @ Bablu & Ors vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 20 November, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18854 of 2017
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -341 Year- 2015 Thana -BUDDHACOLONY District- PATNA

1. Nitish Kumar @ Bablu son of Bhupendra Singh

2. Bhupendra Singh son of Late Akhilanand Singh

3. Minta Devi wife of Bhupendra Singh
All are residents of village- Vyapur, P.S. Maner, District- Patna.

…. …. Petitioner/s
Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Sabita Kumari daughter of Hari Narayan Rai at present residing at Dewanti
Bhawan Dujara Pahalwan Ghat, P.S.- Budha Colony, District- Patna.

…. …. Opposite Party/s

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ramchandra Singh, APP

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 20-11-2017

This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure (for short ‘the CrPC’) has been filed by the petitioners for

quashing the order dated 09.11.2016 passed by the learned Judicial

Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna in G.R. No.9048 of 2015 (Tr. No.2900 of

2007) arising out of Budha Colony P.S. Case No.341 of 2015

whereby and whereunder the learned Magistrate has summoned the

petitioners to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections

341, 323, 498A, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Patna High Court Cr.M isc. No.18854 of 2017 dt.20-11-2017

2/4

Code (for short ‘the ‘IPC’) and Sections 3 and 4 for the Dowry

Prohibition Act (for short ‘the D.P.Act’).

2. From perusal of the First Information Report (for short

‘the FIR’) it would be manifest that the informant has alleged that she

was married to one Manish Kumar @ Guddu son of petitioners no.2

and 3 and brother of petitioner no.1 on 14.12.2010, but after some

time of marriage the accused persons started subjecting her to cruelty

mentally and physically for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. She

has alleged that on a demand of rupees five lacs made by the accused

persons, her mother could somehow manage rupees three lacs and

gave to them, but due to non-fulfillment of entire demand she was

abused, assaulted and kicked out of her matrimonial home on

09.06.2014 along with her two minor children. Thereafter, they came

to her parental home and assaulted her there also.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the police

registered an FIR and on completion of investigation the allegations

made in the FIR were found to be true and a report under Section

173(2) of the CrPC was filed in the court pursuant to which the

learned Magistrate vide impugned order dated 09.11.2016 took

cognizance of the offences alleged and summoned the petitioners.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there

was matrimonial discord between the husband and wife and
Patna High Court Cr.M isc. No.18854 of 2017 dt.20-11-2017

3/4

petitioners being relatives of the husband have wrongly been dragged

in the present case. It is submitted that prior to the institution of the

FIR, the husband of the informant had already instituted Matrimonial

(Divorce) Case No.1012 of 2015 in the Family Court, Patna.

5. On the contrary, learned counsel for the State submitted

that filing of matrimonial case would be of no consequence as the

informant has made specific allegations against the petitioners that

they abused, assaulted and kicked out the informant from her

matrimonial home and they also abused her after going to her parental

home.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused

the record. I find force in the submissions made by the learned

counsel for the State.

7. Having regard to the materials on record, I do not see any

illegality in the order passed by the learned Magistrate. The

statements made by the informant in the FIR do attract ingredients of

the offences alleged against the petitioners. The witnesses examined

during investigation have supported the allegations made by the

informant. The learned Magistrate after having perused the materials

on record found sufficient materials to proceed against the petitioners

and took cognizance of the offences. As far as filing of matrimonial

case prior to the institution of the FIR by the husband of the informant
Patna High Court Cr.M isc. No.18854 of 2017 dt.20-11-2017

4/4

is concerned, the same can be looked into by the trial court at

appropriate stage during trial.

8. The application, being devoid of any merit, is dismissed.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

Md.S./-

AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date
Transmission
Date

Leave a Comment

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