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

2021 Supreme(Jhk) 732

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, J.
Dr. Alok Kumar – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand and Another – Respondents
Criminal Revision No. 442 of 2016
Decided On : 05-03-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. A.K. Sinha.
For the Respondents: Mr. Ravi Prakash, Mrs. Neeta Krishna.

Headnote:

Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 - Sections 203, 203 , 202 and 200 - Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 498A/34, 500 and 499 - Demand of dowry - Defamation – Punishment for defamation - Allegation that his wife would openly declare that her husband has illicit relations who as a matter of fact is a married women with a child - Complaint petition petitioner has given details of offending imputations made by his wife - Petitioner has stated that after marriage he became seriously ill but did not take care of him rather inflicted various acts of torture upon him and finally left for her parents' place - On receiving notice in divorce case and his two brothers threatened him made their intentions clear to implicate him in a false criminal case - Lodged an informatory petition - signed a joint compromise petition promising not to commit any mistake in future and he withdrew divorce case - Attitude of did not change and she continued to harass and humiliate him in various ways, at times she would threaten to commit suicide. She left his company and went to his paternal house at Begusarai and after spending few months there left for her parents' home at Purnea - Petitioner instituted a second divorce case again started putting pressure and threatening him for withdrawing divorce case – Held, petitioner but now according to him his wife is hell bent to defame him by openly castigating his character - Ultimate analysis by the Court his complaint petition and statement on solemn affirmation do not provide a foundation for proceeding - Only his feelings are not sufficient - Petitioner's own stand in complaint petition puts the Magistrate on guard not to make such a decision in matter may effects the other pending proceedings one way or the other learned counsel for O.P. No. 2 has stated that the petitioner has initiated atleast 18 proceedings in different Courts in has been arrayed as the opposite party – Court find that learned Magistrate was of opinion that complainant has failed to lay sufficient materials constituting a prima-facie case of defamation so as to proceed against O.P. No. 2 - Inability to agree with learned Senior Counsel primarily for the reason that this is not a case for remand and I have myself examined the materials on record and having satisfied that there is no merit in this criminal revision petition would dismiss the same - Revision dismissed.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner has assailed legality of the order dated 18.01.2016 by which Complaint Case No. 1599 of 2015 has been dismissed under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.).

2. Mr. A.K. Sinha, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has raised two-fold contentions viz. (i) at the stage of enquiry the Magistrate cannot go into the merits of the case and all that he has to examine is whether a prima-facie case is made out and (ii) complaint petition has been dismissed on the ground that other litigations between the parties are pending, an extraneous ground not to be found in Statute or a judicial decision.

3. Marriage between the parties was solemnized on 18.02.2011. The petitioner has stated that after the marriage he became seriously ill but O.P. No. 2, his wife, did not take care of him rather inflicted various acts of torture upon him and finally on 10.04.2011 left for her parents' place. Constrained, he instituted M.T.S. No. 324 of 2011 for divorce. On receiving notice in the divorce case, O.P. No. 2 and his two brothers threatened him on 14.12.2011 and made their intentions clear to implicate him in a false criminal case. He therefore lodged an informatory petition vide Misc. Case No. 50 of 2011 in the Court of S.D.M. Sadar, Ranchi. In the proceeding of M.T.S. No. 324 of 2011, O.P. No. 2 signed a joint compromise petition promising not to commit any mistake in future and therefore he withdrew divorce case. However, attitude of O.P. No. 2 did not change and she continued to harass and humiliate him in various ways, at times she would threaten to commit suicide. She left his company and went to his paternal house at Begusarai and after spending few months there left for her parents' home at Purnea. The petitioner instituted a second divorce case vide M.T.S. No. 204 of 2013 and O.P. No. 2 again started putting pressure and threatening him for withdrawing divorce case. He then filed Informatory Petition No. 360 of 2013 in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi. One day, O.P. No. 2 forcibly entered into the house which he leased out to D.A.V. Alok Study Centre for five years and created various hindrances on account of which Study Centre was finally closed. It is stated that O.P. No. 2 has filed a criminal case on the allegation that she was harassed and tortured in connection to demand of dowry and her complaint has been registered as Argora P.S. Case No. 313 of 2013 under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. In the aforesaid background, the petitioner has filed Complaint Case No. 1599 of 2015 making allegation that his wife would openly declare that her husband has illicit relations with Shanta Kumari who as a matter of fact is a married women with a child. In paragraph nos. 12 to 15 of the complaint petition the petitioner has given details of the offending imputations made by his wife.

5. Paragraph Nos. 12 to 15 of the complaint are extracted below:

    12- ;g fd fnukad 30-08-2014 dks f'kdk;rdrkZ vius eksjkcknh Fkkuk cfj;krq ftyk jkaph fLFkr vkokl esa VhŒohŒ ns[k jgk Fkk rHkh og bZVhoh ij jgs ,d lk{kkRdkj dks ns[kdj HkkSpDdk jg x;k fd xkxhZ dqekjh f'kdk;rdrkZ ij mlds xyr pfj= dk gksus dk [kqysvke vkjksi yxk jgh FkhA ftlls f'kdk;rdrkZ ds eku lEeku dks Bsl igqapk vkSj ckn esa U;wt ds ml va'k ds lhMh dks f'kdk;rdrkZ us gkfly dj fy;kA ftl lhMh dks bl eqdnes ds lquokbZ ds nkSjku ÁLrqr fd;k tk;sxkA
    mijksDr lk{kkRdkj esa vfHk;qDr }kjk fn, x, lk{kkRdkj dk nks i`"Bksa dk VkbIM dkih bl f'kdk;rokn ds lkFk layXu vuqyXud&4 ds :i esa gSA
    13- ;g fd f'kdk;rdrkZ us fnukad 01-09-2014 dks LFkkuh; v[kckj fgUnqLrku nSfud esa Nih [kcj dks ns[kk rks ik;k fd vfHk;qDr us mlds xyr pfj= ds ckjs esa c;ku fn;k gSA
    mijksDr lekpkj i= dk va'k ,d i`"B esa bl f'kdk;rokn ds lkFk layXu vuqyXud&5 ds :i esa gSA
    14- ;g fd iqu% fnukad 13-04-2015 dks vfHk;qDr us lgk;d fo|qr vfHk;ark] gjeq] jkaph dks fn, x, vius vkosnu esa f'kdk;rdrkZ ds pfj= ij xyr vkjksi yxk;k gS ftlls f'kdk;rdrkZ ds Áfr"Bk dks B





      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 Back to top