SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Rajeev Kumar vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2018


Criminal Miscellaneous No.31508 of 2016
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2396 Year- 2015 Thana -PATNA COM PLAINT CASE District-

Rajeev Kumar, Son of Balram Singh Resident of Mohalla- Nayatola, Madhav Pur,
P.O.+P.S.- Bakhtiyarpur, District- Patna.

…. …. Petitioner/s

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Smt. Anuradha, daughter of Ramjee Singh, wife of Rajeev Kumar, resident o f
Mohalla- Dhananjay Colony, Road No.8, Sanjay Gandhi Nagar, P.O. P.S.
Hanuman Nagar, Patrakar Nagar, District- Patna.

…. …. Opposite Party/s

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pravin Kumar Sinha, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Indra Kumar Singh, A.P.P.

Date: 06-09-2018

1. This application under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the order dated 30.01.2016

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

Complaint Case No. 2396(C) of 2015 by which the learned Magistrate after

holding enquiry has found prima facie case against the petitioner and other

four accused persons for the offences under Section 498A of the Indian

Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. The complainant has filed complaint case against the

husband and his other family members levelling allegation that after

marriage she was tortured in her sasural for demand of dowry and

ultimately she was forced to leave the matrimonial house. The allegation
Patna High Court Cr.M isc. No.31508 of 2016 dt.06-09-2018


has been mentioned in the complaint petition in detail.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

counsel for the State.

4. The court below after holding enquiry has found prima

facie case against the petitioner only who is husband of the complainant for

the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4

of Dowry Prohibition Act. The court below has not found sufficient

material against other accused persons.

5. As per impugned order, this Court finds that court

below has passed order after proper appreciation of the statement of the

witnesses including the Solemn Affirmation of complainant.

6. Therefore, this Court does not find any illegality in the

impugned order.

7. This Criminal Miscellaneous application is

accordingly dismissed.

8. The petitioners are given liberty to raise all the points

as raised in this application in the court below at the appropriate stage

during trial including at the time of framing of charge, which shall be

considered by court below in accordance with law without being prejudic ed

by this order.

(Sanjay Priya, J)

Uploading Date 12/09/2018
Transmission 12/09/2018

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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