The court may quash an FIR when allegations are unsubstantiated, malicious, or arise from a compromised situation post-marriage dissolution, to prevent abuse of the legal process.

JUDGMENT :

CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA, J.

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. The present application has been preferred by the petitioners for quashing of First Information Report dated 22.06.2023, instituted under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506, 313, 376, 498(A)/34 I.P.C and 3/4 of D.P. Act, registered in Bhojpur Mahila P.S. Case No. 35/2023.

3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that informant/O.P. No. 2 was married to Satyam Pandey @ Satyam Kumar (Petitioner no. 2) on 18.02.2022 according to Hindu rites and rituals. In marriage, her father had gifted 15 Lakh in cash and worth of Rs. 8 lacs Jewellery to her in-laws. After few days of marriage, she was physically and mentally tortured by her husband and in- laws. Her husband namely Satyam Pandey used to come every day drunk and fight with her and her in-laws also assisted him to beat her. When she told all facts to her brother Prince Kumar, they started abusing her. It is further alleged that her father in-law Amresh Pandey forcibly started having physical relations with her and he threatened to kill her if she told anything. Thereafter, she became pregnant and was taken to hospital on 25.01.2023, for abortion, and her pregnancy was terminated against her will. When she conveyed all these matters to her brother Prince Kumar, he became depressed and for this reason he committed suicide on 13.03.2023. When she came to her parental house after her brother's death, she was being exploited by her father-in-law and that's why she do not want to go to her in-laws house back and to save her social reputation, she could not talk to anyone regarding her problem. Her parents wanted to go to her in- laws house, but she did not want to go there and therefore without giving any information she left her parental house, thereafter, her father lodged FIR as Ara Nagar Police station. Thereafter, when she came to know about the FIR she went to her sister but her brother produced her before the police, where her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. was recorded by the police.

4. It is submitted by Mr. Ravindra Kumar, learned counsel appearing for petitioners that the informant was not willing to marry with petitioner no. 2 and, therefore when the marriage negotiation started, she left her house for which her father lodged FIR, registered as Magadh Medical P.S. Case No. 28 of 2023 dated 27.01.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code, after couple of days, she returned to her home and while making her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., she categorically stated before learned Jurisdictional Magistrate that she left her house as she was not willing to marry petitioner no. 2. It is submitted that later on upon persuasion of family members, the marriage of informant solemnized with petitioner no. 2 on 18.02.2022 but as the marriage was against the will of the informant, the relation between informant and petitioner no. 2 was never cordial and, therefore, when she visited her parental home to attend shradh ceremony of the brother, she again left her parental house, for which FIR was lodged by her father with Ara Town P.S. Case No. 258 of 2023 dated 31.03.2023. The informant left her parental home on 30.03.2023.

5. It is further submitted that from the face of FIR, it appears that after taking parental home, the informant went to her sister’s home and when this fact came to knowledge of her brother, she was produced before the police, where her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. was recorded.

6. It is submitted that the allegation raised through present FIR against petitioner no. 1, who is father-in-law is completely absurd