SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Pat) 738

HARISH KUMAR
Ajay Anand S/O Vijay Anand – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Manoj Kumar
For the Opposite Party : Mr. A.G.

JUDGMENT :

Harish Kumar, J.

Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. It is to be noted that despite valid service of notice upon the opposite party no. 2, no one appears on her behalf.

3. The petitioner by invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the order dated 14.01.2020 passed by the learned A.D.J.- 3rd, Bhojpur at Ara in Cr. Rev. No. 178 of 2018 arising out of Complaint Case No. 2644 of 2014 whereby the learned court has rejected the revision petition filed on behalf of the petitioner after being found no infirmity in the order dated 21.08.2015 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bhojpur at Ara summoning the accused persons to face trial after taking cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 494, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. Shorn of unnecessary details, the relevant facts for adjudication of the matter are that the marriage of the complainant was solemnised with Abhay Anand on 13.03.2008 as per Hindu rites and rituals. Soon after the marriage, the complainant was subjected to demand of dowry at the hands o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top