SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Premraj Chaudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 17 September, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.8648 of 2016
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2014 Thana- SHRIKRISHNAPURI District- Patna

1. Premraj Chaudhary son of Late Bindeshwari Chaudhary

2. Laxmi Devi wife of Premraj Chaudhary Both are residents of
village- Pasnauli Gagan, P.S.- Maharajganj, District- Siwan

… … Petitioner/s
Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Amita Mehta wife of Mithilesh Kumar, residents of village- Pasnauli Gagan,
P.S.- Maharajganj, District- Siwan at present residing at North Shri
Krishnapuri- 40 Sardar Patel Path, Police Station- S.K. Puri, District Town-
Patna.

… … Opposite Party/s

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 17-09-2018

This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for

quashing the order dated 27.5.2015 passed by the JM, Patna in

Shri Krishnapuri P.S. case no. 75 of 2014 by which learned

Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence under Section

498A IPC and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act against

these petitioner along with husband.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and State.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that

petitioners are father-in-law and mother -in-law of the informant.

In the written report, there is specific allegation against

both these petitioners of committing physical and mental torture

with the informant along with her husband.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8648 of 2016 dt.17-09-2018
2/2

The learned court below has mentioned in the impugned

order that police after investigation submitted charge-sheet against

these petitioners along with husband. Learned Magistrate after

looking into the materials available in the case diary and allegation

in the written report has taken cognizance against these

petitioners along with husband for the offence under Section

498A and Section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act.

The Court below is only required to see prima facie case at

the time of taking cognizance. Therefore, this Court does not find

any illegality in impugned orders passed by the Court below.

This Cr. Misc. petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

The Court below will proceed in the case in accordance

with law.

The petitioners are given liberty to raise all the points, as

raised in the present application, at the time of framing of charge,

which shall be considered and disposed off by the learned court

below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this

order.

(Sanjay Priya, J)

shyambihari/-

AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 21.09.2018
Transmission Date 21.09.2018

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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