SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Dinesh Patel & Ors vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 26 April, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.30244 of 2012
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -697 Year- 2012 Thana -null District- PATNA

1. Dinesh Patel S/O Ramekbal Patel R/O Village – Hajipur Rambhadra, Devi
Asthan, P.S. Hajipur, Distt. – Vaishali

2. Ramekbal Patel S/O Charitra Patel R/O Village – Hajipur Rambhadra, Devi
Asthan, P.S. Hajipur, Distt. – Vaishali

3. Munia Devi W/O Ramekbal Patel R/O Village – Hajipur Rambhadra, Devi
Asthan, P.S. Hajipur, Distt. – Vaishali

…. …. Petitioners
Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Rani Patel W/O Dinesh Patel, D/O Bindeshwar Singh R/O Vill. – Madarna, P.S.
Distt. Hajipur At Present New Jaganpura, P.S. Ramkrishna Nagar, Distt. –
Patna

…. …. Opposite Parties

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the complainant : Mr. Santosh Kumar Deepak, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, APP

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 26-04-2017

Heard the counsel for the petitioners, the counsel for the

complainant (Opposite Party No. 2) and the learned APP for the

State.

2. The petitioners seek quashing of order dated 02.07.2012

passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna in

complaint case No. 697 ( C) of 2012, whereunder the court below

finding prima facie case for the offences under Section 498A of the

Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30244 of 2012 dt.26-04-2017

2/4

ordered for issuance of summons against the present petitioners.

3. The complainant (Opposite Party No. 2) filed a

complaint case on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate against the

petitioners and two others, alleging inter alia that after marriage,

which took place on 09.05.1997. She came at her matrimonial

place where the petitioners, who are husband and parents-in-laws

started torturing her in connection with demand of Rs. 50,000/- in

cash and a colour T.V. The complainant and her witnesses at the

time of enquiry supported the allegation of torture and the court

below considering the materials available on record passed the

impugned order.

4. The counsel for the petitioners submits that the

marriage took place in the year 1997 and from the said wedlock,

the complainant got two children who are aged about 10 years and

7 years respectively. The complainant has some relationship with

one Pawan Kumar and she voluntarily left the house of the

petitioners and started residing with Pawan Kumar leaving her two

children at the mercy of these petitioners. The said Pawan Kumar

and one Pappu Kumar have been examined by the complainant.

They are strangers to the family of the petitioners having their

residence at different place at Patna. It was further submitted that
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30244 of 2012 dt.26-04-2017

3/4

there is absolutely nothing against the petitioners so as to order for

issuance of summons. It was also submitted that the complainant

(Opposite Party No. 2) has entered into compromise on 04.08.2014

and since then she is residing with the petitioners in the light of

undertaking and assurance given by the petitioners to keep the

complainant with full honour and dignity.

5. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 as well as

the learned APP for the State opposed the submissions made on

behalf of the petitioners.

6. On perusal of the Lower Court Records (LCR), I find

that the marriage of the complainant took place on 09.05.1997. She

has alleged cruelty against the petitioners since 25.09.2009, on

which date, she was allegedly assaulted at her matrimonial place.

The occurrence allegedly took place in her matrimonial house, but

not a single witness has been examined from the locality of her

matrimonial place. None of the relative of the complainant has

come forward to support her case of cruelty. The witness A.W.-1

(Pappu Kumar) is aged about 25 years and he was examined on

28th May, 2012, wherein he has stated that he knows the

complainant since last one year. He has not stated about any

acquaintance with any of the petitioners. A.W.-2 (Pawan Kumar) is
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30244 of 2012 dt.26-04-2017

4/4

aged about 20 years, who is one of the tutor in the coaching

institute run by the complainant. Both the witnesses are resident of

different place located at Patna. The allegation of torture also

appears omnibus.

7. In view of above, I find that continuance of prosecution

against the petitioners would amount to abuse of process of the

Court.

8. Accordingly, the order dated 02.07.2012 is set aside and

the petition is allowed.

(Sanjay Kumar, J)

ajaypd./-

AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 28.04.2017
Transmission 28.04.2017
Date

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