SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sangita Kumari & Ors vs The State Of Bihar on 7 January, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 29037 of 2014
Arising Out of Complaint Case No.-461 Year-2013 Thana- AURANGABAD COMPLAINT
CASE District- Aurangabad

1. Sangita Kumari, Daughter of Late Deonandan Yadav, Resident of
Village+P.O+P.S. Chanchet, near Missan School, District- Dhanbad
(Jharkhand).

2. Gita Devi, Wife of Baijnath Yadav.

3. Baijnath Yadav, Son of Shivnandan Yadav.
Both resident of Village+ P.O.+ P.S. Panchet, near Missan School, District
Dhanbad (Jharkhand).

4. Muniya Devi, Wife of Shambhu Yadav.

5. Shambhu Yadav, Son of Late Police Yadav.
Both Resident of Village+P.O.+ P.S. Panchet, near Missan School, District-
Dhanbad (Jharkhand).

… … Petitioner/s
Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Puspa Devi D/o Dew Pujan Yadav, Village-Mayapur, P.O.- Dhanalla, P.S.-
Daudnagar, District- Aurangabad.

… … Opposite Party/s

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN
AMANULLAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 07-01-2019

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

A.P.P. for the State.

2. Despite valid service of notice to opposite party no. 2

nobody appeared on her behalf when the matter was taken up and

heard.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29037 of 2014 dt.07-01-2019
2/3

3. The petitioners have moved the Court under Section

482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for the following

relief:

“That this is an application for
quashing the order dated 17.12.2013 passed by
learned S.D.J.M. Daudnagar, Aurangabad in
Complaint Case No. 461 of 2013, whereby and
where under the learned court below has taking
cognizance under Section 498A, 323 of I.P.C.”

4. The opposite party no. 2 filed Complaint Case No.

461 of 2013 against the petitioners and her husband, who is not a

party here. The petitioners no. 1, 2 and 4 are the sisters of the

husband of the opposite party no. 2 whereas the petitioners no. 3

and 5 are the husbands of the petitioners no. 2 and 4 respectively.

The allegation against all the accused is general and omnibus of

torture and demand of dowry. However, there is also specific

allegation of assault by iron rod but the same is against the other

co-accused husband and not these petitioners.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

they are the sisters and brothers-in-law of the husband of the

opposite party no. 2 and only because of such relationship they

have been made accused. Learned counsel submitted that at best, it

is a dispute between the husband and the wife but the petitioners

have no role in such relationship or for whatever might have
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29037 of 2014 dt.07-01-2019
3/3

happened between the couple. Learned counsel submitted that the

allegations are wage and omnibus and nothing specific.

6. Learned A.P.P. could not controvert the fact that the

allegations against the petitioners are vague and omnibus without

any specific instances.

7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court

finds that a case for interference has been made out. The

petitioners being the close relatives of the husband and what has

been narrated in the complaint clearly indicate that the same has

been done to harass the family of the husband without there being

any direct role played by them. The same clearly appears to be

with mala fide intention for wreaking vengeance.

8. For the reasons aforesaid, the application is allowed.

The entire Complaint Case No. 461 of 2013 along with the order

taking cognizance dated 17.12.2013 under Section 498A and 323

of the Indian Penal Code, as far as it relates to the petitioners,

stand quashed.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR
U
T

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