The veracity of a prayer for quashment should be determined based on the soundness, reasonableness, and indubitability of the material, ruling out the assertions contained in the charges, and whether proceeding with the trial would result in an abuse of process of the court.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Sudarshan Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Sanjay Kumar Srviastava and Mr. Satish Kumar, learned counsel for the State.

2. This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including order taking cognizance dated 17.02.2012 in connection with Complaint Case No. 208 of 2008, pending in the Court of learned C.J.M., Lohardaga.

3. The complaint case has been filed alleging therein the petitioner no. 1 mother-in-law of the complainant and petitioner no. 2 is the Dewar (brother-in-law of the complainant and Sheo Narayan Lal Agrawal (father in law) is dead. The marriage of the complainant was performed with Praveen Kumar Agrawal since deceased on 19.01.2006 according to the Hindu custom.

It was further alleged that at the time of marriage several articles were given to the accused petitioners including the cash.

It was further alleged that after marriage she went to matrimonial house and subsequently the accused petitioners raised for further demand for dowry and they were pressurized the complainant and her husband with respect of said demand.

It was further alleged that the accused persons were regularly threatening the husband of the complainant that so share in any property will be given to him till he will divorce his wife. The complainant having cordial relation with her husband but due to interference and threatening given by the accused persons to the complainant as well as her husband both were residing separately in two different places.

It was further alleged that on 14th June, 2007 the complainant gave birth to a female child at Ursuline Hospital, Lohardaga and this news was communicated to the husband by the relatives of the complainant her husband was very happy and was eager to talk with the complainant but as the complainant was in female was inside the hospital hence he could not talk with the complainant.

It was further alleged that the complainant received no message from her husband till 23.06.2007 and therefore she requested her relatives to have contact with her husband the relatives of the complainant dialed several times and tried to talk with the husband but could not approach Praveen Kumar.

It was further alleged that on 20.07.2007 the accused Sheo Narayan Lal, Smt. Renuka Devi and Abhay Kumar came to Lohardaga and requested the complainant to put her signature on two blank sheets of paper and when the complainant refused to put her signature and stated that she will talk with her husband and after his consent and in his presence she will put her signature thereupon the accused persons became angry and started abusing the complainant and told the complainant that her husband is no more in the world.

It was further alleged that the husband of the complainant was legal practitioner and was practicing at Patna but due to ill treatment and misbehave and also due to mental torture of the accused persons has left his profession and was living of village Koach since last six months and two days prior to his death he has gone to Patna to bring his bag and baggage and during his stay at Patna the accused persons extended threats and misbehaved with him which compelled Praveen Kumar to commit suicide.

It was further alleged that it was non but the accused persons who compelled the husband of the complainant to get himself separated from the complainant due to non fulfilment of their illegal demands, otherwise her husband would not have committed suicide. 4. Mr. Sudarshan Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no. 1 is mother-in-law and petitioner no. 2 is brother-in-law of the O.P. No. 2 and father-in-law of the O.P. No. 2 has already left of his heavenly abode. He submits that the present case is counter blast of Shastri Nagar, Patna P.S. Case No. 131 of 2007 registered under section 306/34 of the I.P.C. against the O.P. No.2 for abetment of suicide of her husband of O.P. No. 2. He further submits that in that case police has inv