SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Guddi Devi @ Lali Devi & Ors vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 20 April, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.7231 of 2013
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1824 Year- 2010 Thana -PURNIA COMPLAINT CASE District- Purnea

1. Guddi Devi @ Lali Devi W/O Rajaram Sah, D/O Shankar Kapar Resident Of
Village- Khaira Chanda, Police Station- Narpatganj, District- Araria

2. Shankar Kapar S/O Late Soti Lal Kapar Resident Of Village- Khaira Chanda,
Police Station- Narpatganj, District- Araria

3. Mahesh Kapar S/O Shankar Kapar Resident Of Village- Khaira Chanda, Police
Station- Narpatganj, District- Araria

…. …. Petitioner/s
Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Rajaram Sah @ Rajesh Kumar S/O Sant Lal Sah Resident Of Village- Mahalbari
Tola Male Bitta, Police Staiton- Dagarua, District- Purnea

…. …. Opposite Party/s

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Rana
For the Opposite Party/s : None

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 20-04-2017

Heard the Counsel for the petitioner. No one has

appeared on behalf of O.P. No. 2 in spite of notices.

The petitioners are the wife, father-in-law and brother-

in-law of the complainant (O.P. No. 2). They have assailed the order

dated 30.08.2012 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate,

Purnea in Complaint Case No. 1824 of 2010 wherein after enquiry

into the complaint lodged by the O.P. No. 2, cognizance under

Section 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken.

The case of the complainant, in brief, is that he was

married with petitioner no. 1 whereafter she came to the sasural and
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7231 of 2013 dt.20-04-2017

2/3

lived with him. His wife later came to know about his ailment and

started quarreling with him. At times, she used to leave the home and

go to Naihar. In June, 2009, his wife left the matrimonial home and

started living in Naihar. The complainant went there and tried to take

her back which she refused. Again, he went to Sasural to take his wife

back and brought her to the Sasural on 25.5.2010. On 30.5.2010, the

accuseds came to his house and stayed overnight. In the morning

when he was away from house, she left the house along with cash of

Rs. 5,000/-, 20 bhar silver and 04 bhar gold besides her belongings.

Counsel for the petitioner states that the articles which

are said to have taken away by the petitioner no. 1 was/were stridhan.

The present prosecution was lodged by the complainant/husband in

retaliation to the complaint lodged by the wife (petitioner no. 1)

against her husband under Section 498A IPC on 31.5.2010. If such

prosecution is allowed to continue, the same shall result in complete

miscarriage of justice.

On going through the complaint, it is found that the

allegation is of taking away the belongings of the wife. The jewellary

which is said to have been taken away by the wife and her father and

brother is generally considered the stridhan of the lady/wife. That

apart, it appears the process of the Court was apparently misused by

the husband (complainant) to put undue pressure on his wife and her
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7231 of 2013 dt.20-04-2017

3/3

other close family members.

In the setting of these facts clearly evidencing from the

record, the continuance of the present proceeding, in the opinion of

the Court, would result in miscarriage of justice.

Consequently, the application is allowed. The order

dated 30.08.2012 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate,

Purnea in Complaint Case No. 1824 of 2010 is set aside.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J)
Pankaj/-

AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 24.04.2017
Transmission 24.04.2017
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