IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12483 of 2015
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2013 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Gaya
Anil Kumar Son of Awadh Bihari Singh @ Awadh Bihari Ram, Resident of
Village – Belaganj Agrawal High School, Belaganj, P.S. – Belaganj, District –
Gaya.
… … Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Punita Devi Wife of Anil Kumar, Resident of Village – Belaganj Agrawal
High School, Belaganj, P.S. Belaganj, District Gaya, at present residing at
Mohalla Bairagi, P.S. Delha, District – Gaya.
… … Opposite Party/s
WITH
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 13848 of 2015
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2013 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Gaya
Pawan Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Son of Late Yugal Kishore Prasad
resident of village – Ariki, P.S. Belaganj, District – Gaya
… … Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Punita Devi wife of Anil Kumar resident of village – Belaganj Agrawal High
School, Belaganj, P.S. Belaganj, District – Gaya, at present residing at
Mohalla Bairagi, P.S. Delha, District – Gaya
… … Opposite Party/s
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 12483 of 2015)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Durgesh Nandan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. S.Dayal, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 13848 of 2015)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Durgesh Nandan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.S.Dayal, APP
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 02-09-2019
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12483 of 2015 dt.02-09-2019
2/4
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. No one
appears on behalf of Opposite Party No.2.
2. The petitioners are accused in connection with
(Gaya) Mahila P.S. Case No.41 of 2013, corresponding to Tr.
No.2938 of 2015.
3. By the impugned order dated 19.01.2015, the
learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Gaya, has taken
cognizance against the petitioners on police report submitted
under Section 173 Cr.P.C. for offences under Section 498A/Section34,
Section323/Section34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/Section4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act.
4. Opposite Party No.2 has filed counter affidavit in
Cr. Misc. No.12483 of 2015 brought by the husband Anil
Kumar. However, she has not filed any counter affidavit in Cr.
Misc. No.13848 of 2015 filed by Pawan Kumar @ Pankaj
Kumar @ Pankaj, the brother-in-law of the husband of Opposite
Party No.2.
5. According to FIR, the marriage of Opposite
Party No.2 took place with petitioner Anil Kumar in April,
2002. In spite of sufficient gift given by father of the informant
as detailed in the FIR, accused Anil Kumar was demanding a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12483 of 2015 dt.02-09-2019
3/4
motorcycle and after interference by the relations and family
members, the informant was allowed to go to her matrimonial
home. In the matrimonial home again demand of motorcycle by
the named family members (not petitioner Pankaj Kumar) and
the allegation of mental and physical torture, as well is
attributed. Only allegation against petitioner Pawan Kumar @
Pankaj Kumar is that he had also accompanied other accused in
taking back the informant to her parents house on an auto
rickshaw.
6. In the counter affidavit, Opposite Party No.2
asserted the allegation of demand of motorcycle and torture for
non-fulfillment of the same specifically against the husband and
other family members and she has enclosed a letter addressed by
the husband to the parents of the informant wherein the husband
has stated that if the motorcycle would not be provided it would
result in dire consequences. Two letters dated 06.05.2003 and
21.05.2003 are enclosed at Annexure-B series. In the counter
affidavit, she has not alleged anything against petitioner Pawan
Kumar. The petitioner Anil Kumar has filed supplementary
affidavit stating therein that petitioner is paying Rs.750/- to the
wife, Opposite Party No.2, in pursuance of order dated
07.05.2015 passed by this Court. However, the long due
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12483 of 2015 dt.02-09-2019
4/4
amount was paid on the recent query of the Court.
7. On the basis of the material available on the
record, prima facie no offence is disclosed against petitioner
Pawan Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar. Hence, criminal prosecution
of petitioner Pawan Kumar @ Pankaj is an abuse of the process
of the Court, which cannot be allowed to stand. Hence, the
impugned order to the extent it affects Pawan Kumar @ Pankaj
Kumar, is hereby stands quashed and his application stands
allowed.
8. However, there is sufficient material against
petitioner Anil Kumar, as discussed above, to proceed against
him with the criminal proceeding. Hence, his application for
quashing the cognizance order is hereby stands dismissed.
(Birendra Kumar, J)
Mkr./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 06.09.2019
Transmission Date 06.09.2019