SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Deepak Tiwary & Ors vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 10 July, 2018


Criminal Miscellaneous No.3821 of 2015
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -324 Year- 2013 Thana -PHULWARI District- PATNA

1. Deepak Tiwary (Husband), s/o Kameshwar Tiwary,

2. Raj Kishore Tiwary @ Lal Babu (Vaisur), s/o Kameshwar Tiwary,

3. Kameshwar Tiwary (Father- in-Law), s/o late Srikant Tiwary,

4. Geeta Devi, w/o Kameshwar Tiwary, all resident of Mohalla- Aadarsh Nagar,
Road No.2, Phulwarisharif, P.S. – Phulwarisharif, District – Patna.

…. …. Petitioner/s


1. The State of Bihar,

2. Punam Kumari @ Rupa Kumari, D/o Sri Mahesh Ojha, resident of Mohalla –
Ramkrishna Nagar, P.S. – Ramkrishna Nagar, District – Patna.

…. …. Opposite Party/s

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP

Date: 10-07-2018

This application under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the order dated

20.11.2013 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Patna, in

Phulwarisharif P.S. Case No.324 of 2013 by which the learned

Magistrate has taken cognizance against the Petitioners for the

offence under Section(s) 498A/34 Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4

of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Heard counsel for the Petitioners and the State.

Counsel for the Petitioners submits that there is no

allegation of any specific overt act against Petitioner Nos.2, 3, and 4,
Patna High Court Cr.M isc. No.3821 of 2015 dt.10-07-2018


who are brother-in-law (Bhaisur), father-in-law and mother-in-law of

the Informant. Counsel for the petitioners has relied on the decision

of the Supreme Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra and anr. vs.

State of UP and anr. reported in 2013 (1) PLJR 10.

It has been submitted that there is growing tendency to

implicate all the family members in matrimonial dispute.

Notice was issued to the Opposite Party No.2, which

has been validly served, but none has appeared on behalf of Opposite

Party No.2.

From the allegation in the written report, this Court

finds that there is specific allegation of overt act against the husband,

Deepak Tiwari, (Petitioner No.1).

A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of

the Petitioners, wherein, it has been mentioned that Informant has

filed a case for maintenance against the husband which is pending

before Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna, vide Matrimonial

Case No.1761 (M) of 2014.

In the circumstances, this court is not inclined to

interfere with the impugned order with regard to Petitioner No.1,

who is husband of the Informant.

So far as Petitioner Nos.2, 3 and 4 are concerned, they

are family members of husband of the informant. There is no
Patna High Court Cr.M isc. No.3821 of 2015 dt.10-07-2018


allegation of any specific overt act against them.

In view of such, impugned order dated 20.11.2013

passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Patna, in Phulwarisharif P.S. Case

No.324 of 2013 along with entire criminal proceeding with regard to

Petitioner Nos.2, 3 and 4, is hereby quashed.

This application is, accordingly, allowed in part.

The Court below will proceed with the case against

Petitioner No.1 (husband) in accordance with law.

(Sanjay Priya, J)

Uploading Date 16-07-2018
Transmission 16-07-2018

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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