IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21335 of 2015
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1020 Year-2013 Thana- MUNGER COMPLAINT CASE
District- Munger
1. Zohra Begum, W/o Late Md. Sirajuddin
2. Musarrat Begum, W/o Md. Formud
3. Samar Khatoon, W/o Md. Siraj
4. Istekhar @ Md. Rinku, S/o Late Md. Sirajuddin, R/o Village – Mabarak
Chak, P.S. – Muffasil, District – Munger.
… … Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Farzana Parween, W/o Md. Mumtaz Ali @ Shahin, R/o Village – Mabarak
Chak, P.S. – Muffasil, District – Munger at present D/o Md. Haider, R/o
Village – Banaodha, P.S. – Mufassil, District – Munger.
… … Opposite Party/s
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 31822 of 2015
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1020 Year-2013 Thana- MUNGER COMPLAINT CASE
District- Munger
Md. Mumtaz @ Shahin, S/o Late Md. Sirajuddin, R/o Village Mabarak Chak,
P.S. Mufassil, District Munger
… … Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Farzana Parween, W/o Md. Mumtaz Ali @ Shahin, R/o Village – Mabarak
Chak, P.S. – Muffasil, District – Munger at present D/o Md. Haider, R/o
Village – Banaodha, P.S. – Mufassil, District – Munger.
… … Opposite Party/s
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 21335 of 2015)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kr. Ranjit Ranjan, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 31822 of 2015)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Hirday Prasad Singh APP
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 08-08-2019
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21335 of 2015 dt.08-08-2019
2/2
2. In both the applications, order of cognizance dated
09.07.2014, passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial
Magistrate, Munger, in Complaint Case No. 1020(C) of 2013, is
under challenge whereunder on the complaint of opposite party no.
2, cognizance was taken under Section 498A of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is
that the parties have settled their dispute and a joint compromise
petition has already been filed which is available at Annexure-5 to
the supplementary affidavit.
4. Considering the nature of allegation and
compounding of offences between the parties, continuance of the
criminal prosecution is abuse of the process of the Court. Hence,
the impugned order and entire criminal prosecution against the
petitioners stand quashed and this application stands allowed.
(Birendra Kumar, J)
Kundan/-
AFR/NAFR N.A.
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 14.08.2019
Transmission Date 14.08.2019