Back
[2012 (2) East Cr C 589 (Pat)]
PATNA HIGH COURT
HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
Rajesh Kumar Singh & Ors.-Petitioners
Versus
State of Bihar & Anr.-Opp. Parties
Cri Misc. No. 8291 of 2009,
Decided on: March 14, 2012
Section 482 - Quashing of Order - Indian Penal Code - Section 498-A - [Section 482] - [Indian Penal Code, Section 498-A] - The court discussed the essential elements of Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, emphasizing the requirement of marriage, cruelty or harassment, and the involvement of the husband or his relatives. The court also highlighted the definition of cruelty and harassment as per the explanation provided in the section. The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of the alleged illicit relationship and its impact on the mental torture of the complainant, leading to the partial quashing of the impugned order.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant alleged cruelty and harassment by the petitioners, including illegal dowry demands and an illicit relationship between the husband and petitioner No. 3. The trial court found a prima facie case under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and ordered summons against the petitioners.
Finding of the Court:
The court partially allowed the quashing petition, quashing the impugned order in respect of petitioner No. 2 and petitioner No. 3, but dismissing the prayer for quashing the impugned order in respect of petitioner No.1. The further proceeding of the complaint case was stayed for petitioner No. 1.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the alleged illegal dowry demands, the illicit relationship, and the application of Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the essential elements of Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and interpreted the alleged illicit relationship's impact on the mental torture of the complainant, leading to the partial quashing of the impugned order.
Final Decision: The quashing petition was partly allowed, quashing the impugned order in respect of petitioner No. 2 and petitioner No. 3, but dismissing the prayer for quashing the impugned order in respect of petitioner No.1. The further proceeding of the complaint case was stayed for petitioner No. 1.
By Court.- This petition has been preferred under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing the order dated 06.02.2009 passed by Sri O.P. Srivastava, learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate. Saharsa in Complaint Case No. 1600 C of 2008 by which the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa having conducted an enquiry under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. found prima facie case under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners and ordered to issue summons against them to procure•, their attendance for facing the trial for the above stated offence and by the same order he refused to summon against accused Brajesh Kumar Singh.
2. The brief fact, which lies to me this quashing petition, is that Opposite Party No.2. namely, Sangita Singh filed complaint Case bearing Complaint case No.1600 C of 2008 against the petitioners and one Brajesh Kumar Singh alleging therein that her marriage was solemnized with the petitioner No.1 on 10.07.1988 and at the time of marriage, her father had given rupees five lacs and ornaments worth rupees five lacs in gift but when. she went to her in-laws house, petitioners and above stated Brajesh Kumar Singh started pressurizing her to fetch rupees one lacs more and one maruti car in dowry and when she made protest, she was subjected to cruelty and harassment by the petitioners and above stated Brajesh Kumar Singh and in the meantime, she came to know about the illicit relationship of petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.3. She further alleged that when she raised objection about the above stated illicit relationship, she was mercilessly beaten up by the petitioners and aforesaid Brajesh Kumar Singh on 06.08.2005 and. thereafter, she gave information about the above stated incident to her natal people and also gave a written report to concerned police station. The above sated incident was enquired by the police and the petitioner as well as aforesaid Brajesh Kumar Singh were warned by the police officials. She further alleged that on 29.08.2005 an informatory petition bearing Sanha No. 1422 of 2005 was given by her before Sub Divisional Magistrate. Saharsa and when petitioners and Brajesh Kumar Singh came to know about the filing of aforesaid Sanha petition, they made captive her in a room and stopped providing any meal to her but, anyhow, her neighbours came to know about her condition and they got unlocked the room and thereafter, she was ousted from her matrimonial home on 02.09.2005, and on that very date she was again beaten up by her in-laws including her husband. She came to her parents' house and informed her parents about the above stated incident but she did not lodge any case against her in-laws as well as her husband. She further alleged that on 15.09.2008, she alongwith her father, namely, Sri Bishundeo Singh went to the house of her husband but her husband as well as in laws misbehaved with her and also assaulted her and again repeated the above stated illegal demand and. thereafter, on 16.09.2008, she gave a petition to State Women Commission. Patna as well as Secretary, Human Rights, Delhi and also filed the above stated complaint case on 20.10.2008.
3. The learned trial Court after conducting an enquiry under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. passed the impugned order in the manner as stated above.
4. The Opposite party No.2 made her appearance before this Court and the case was admitted on 30.08.2010 for hearing. The matter was referred, to Patna High Court. Mediation and Conciliation Centre vide order dated 12.07.2011 and the parties appeared before the Mediation Centre. Patna High Court, Patna but mediation could not succeed and. accordingly, the above stated mediation centre reported to this Court that in spite of best efforts taken by mediation centre, mediation could not be materialized.
5. Both the parties were heard by this Court in length.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that according to complaint case itself, the marriage of Op
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
