Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State duly assisted by learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

2. The present application has been filed for quashing of the order dated 25.07.2015 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Danapur whereby the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offences punishable under Sections 494 and 498-A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and process has been issued against the petitioners in connection with Rupashpur P.S. Case No.70 of 2015.

3. The case of the prosecution as per FIR is that the husband of complainant has solemized second marriage with another girl illegally with the help of the petitioners and other co-accused persons named in the FIR. Informant, namely Sindhu Devi, alleged that her marriage was solemnized with one Sri Ashutosh Kumar on 27.02.2009 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Rituals. She further alleged that a baby girl was born on 21.02.2010 from said wedlock. Informant further stated that on 18.03.2015, she along with her father got information that her husband solemnized second marriage with one Mintu Kumari with the help of the petitioners and other co-accused person on 02.12.2014 and after finding information correct, she instituted present case against the petitioners and other family members as well as relative of the family of her husband.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that apparently from the narration of the FIR, no prima facie case made out against the petitioners. It is submitted that both petitioners are married Nanad (sister-in-law) of the informant, where marriage of petitioner no.1 was solemnized in the year 1998 and marriage of petitioner no.2 was solemnized in the year 2006 and since then, they are living separately with their families, having otherwise no connection with daily and domestic affairs with the family of the informant and her husband. It is further submitted that initially the FIR was lodged under Sections 494/34 of the IPC, as husband of the informant solemnized his marriage without getting it dissolved with opposite party no.2 but, after investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted under Section 498-A of the IPC also, without having any iota of allegation through written information available agaisnt petitioners. While concluding argument, it is pointed out by learned counsel that prior to this case, a complaint case was also lodged by opposite party no.2 bearing Complaint Case No.233(c) of 2013, where learned Trial Court after inquiry took cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act vide order dated 22.04.2013. It is also submitted by learned counsel that petitioners were also arrayed as an accused in said complaint petition. He further submitted that multiplicity of lodging case is only reflecting the harassing attitude out of ulterior and oblique motive of opposite party no.2 and, therefore, the impugned order taking cognizance is fit to be quashed and set aside. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court as passed in the matter of Abhishek vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 1083

[: 2023 (5) BLJ 289 (SC)].

5. Learned APP for the State duly assisted by learned counsel for opposite party No.2 while opposing the application submitted that petitioners are married sisters-in-law. It is submitted that both the petitioners have actively participated in the occurrence and were instrumental to solemnized second marriage of husband of opposite party no.2.

6. It would be apposite to reproduce para- 13, 14, 15, 16 & 17 of the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in the case of Abhishek Case (supra), which are as under:—

“13. Instances of a husband's family members filing a petition to quash criminal proceedings launched