SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sheo Kumari Devi & Ors vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 2 May, 2018


Criminal Miscellaneous No.25844 of 2016
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1753 Year- 2014 Thana -EAST CHAMPARAN COM PLAINT

1. Sheo Kumari Devi, wife of Shri Chandrama Singh

2. Chandrama Singh, son of Late Bishwanath Singh

3. Kuer Singh @ Kunwar Singh, s/o Chandrama Singh

4. Harendra Singh, s/o Chandrama Singh

All are residents of Village Suryapura, PS Basantpur, District Siwan
…. …. Petitioner/s

1. State of Bihar

2. Priyanka Devi, W/o Pappu Singh, D/o Ram Lochan Singh, r/o Village East
Pakri, PS Dumaria Ghat, District East Champaran
…. …. Opposite Party/s

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Bilash Rai Raman, APP 49

Date: 02-05-2018

Seeking quashing of an order dated 06.08.2015 passed by

the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Sadar Motihari in Complaint Case

No. 1753 of 2014 for offences under Sections 323, 341, 498A,

504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry

Prohibition Act against the applicants, this application has been filed

under Section 482, Cr.P.C.

It is the case of the applicants that they are only related to

the complainant-respondent herein. They have not committed any

offence and on the basis of general and omnibus allegations they are

being implicated in the case and seek quashing of the complaint.
Patna High Court Cr.M isc. No.25844 of 2016 dt.02-05-2018


However, on perusal of the complaint, the pleadings

made therein and the statement of the complainant herself it is seen

that the complainant was married to respondent no. 1- accused,

namely, Pappu Singh on 14.05.2009 and thereafter she was staying

with him. He went to Ludhiyana and was working in a Jeans Factory

there at Ludhiyana. It is stated that the complainant was staying with

the present applicants who are her mother-in-law, father-in-law,

brother-in-law and other relatives and specific allegations have been

made with regard to her harassment on various dates from the year

2013, particularly on 15.12.2013 and 10.08.2014. It is the case of the

complainant that after her husband solemnized the second marriage

at Ludhiyana the applicants started harassing her by demanding

dowry and other articles. She informed her parents of her torture and

when they did not accede to the demand of dowry the applicants

drove her out of home on 15.12.2013 while she was pregnant of six


Keeping in view the serious nature of allegations made in

the complaint which are specific in nature attributed against the

applicants for their acts of omission and commission to the

complainant, it is not a fit case where exercising jurisdiction of this

Court under Section 482 Cr.PC complaint can be quashed.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed with liberty to
Patna High Court Cr.M isc. No.25844 of 2016 dt.02-05-2018


the applicants to raise all the pleas which have been raised here by

filing an appropriate petition before the court below.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ)


Uploading Date 03/05/2018

Leave a Reply

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

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