SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ashok Kumar Mishra & Ors vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 15 September, 2017

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45577 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -308 Year- 2013 Thana -JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE District-

1. Ashok Kumar Mishra Son of Late Gopi Nath Mishra (Sasur)

2. Kiran Devi Wife of Ashok Kumar Mishra (Sas)

3. Kundan Kumar Mishra @ Nandu Son of Ashok Kumar Mishra (Dewar) All
R/o Village Dhaniya Bagicha, Gautam Butha Colony, Delha Gaya, P.S. Barki
Delha, P.O Delha, District Gaya

…. …. Petitioner/s

1. The State of Bihar

2. Priti Kumari Wife of Shyam Mishra, D/o Umesh Mishra R/o Pathak Toli,
Jehanabad, P.S. District Jehanabad

…. …. Opposite Party/s


For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Fahimuddin (APP)

Date: 15-09-2017

Heard Shri Satish Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. The present petition has been filed for quashing the order

dated 03.12.2013 passed in Complaint Case No. 308 of 2013 by the

learned S.D.J.M., Jehanabad taking cognizance under Section 498A of

the Indian Penal Code and Sections ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act

against the petitioners herein.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

matter has already been settled between the parties and in support

thereof, he produces a compromise petition filed before the learned

trial court dated 14.01.2015, wherein it has been submitted that the

opposite party no. 2 has received one time lump sum amount of Rs.

3,35,000/- by a bank draft. In the said compromise petition, it has
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45577 of 2014 dt.15-09-2017


also been undertaken by the parties to obtain a decree of divorce in

the pending divorce proceeding as well as to withdraw the criminal

case filed against each other. The aforesaid compromise petition

produced by the learned counsel for the petitioners is taken on record.

4. The learned counsel further produces a photo copy of the

demand draft for a sum of Rs. 3, 35,000/- which is also taken on


5. Nobody appears on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 despite

valid service of notice as informed by the Registry. Hence, it appears

that on account of the aforesaid compromise entered into between the

parties, the opposite party no. 2 has lost interest of the present case.

6. For the reasons stated hereinabove as also on account of the

compromise entered into between the parties, I deem it fit and proper

to quash the order dated 03.12.2012 passed by the learned S.D.J.M.,


7. The petition is allowed and the order dated 03.12.2012

passed in Complaint Case No.308 of 2013 by the learned S.D.J.M.,

Jehanabad, is hereby quashed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)

Uploading Date

Leave a Reply

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

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

Recent Comments


Copyright © 2024 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation