IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.
Manoj Kumar Madan - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Opposite Party
Cr.M.P. No.1530 of 2024
Decided On : 13-01-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of criminal charges against petitioners. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding lack of offences post-divorce. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. court's observations on divorce and legal implications. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. analysis of allegations and lack of evidence. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. conclusion quashing criminal proceedings. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT :
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Heard the parties.
2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceeding including the summoning order dated 18.08.2023 passed in the Complaint Case No.500 of 2022 by learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj by which the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj has found sufficient material available in the record to proceed inter alia against the petitioners for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 379, 498A, 494, 420, 504, 506/34 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner no.1 is the husband and petitioner no.2 is the own sister of the informant/opposite party no.2 and the allegation against the petitioner no.1 is that during the subsistence of his marriage with the informant, he married with the petitioner no.2 and treated the informant/opposite party no.2 with cruelty and the informant/opposite party no.2 has been driven out from her matrimonial house and when she was driven out from her matrimonial house but her jewelleries, clothes and other valuables are still in her matrimonial house.
4. On the basis of written report submitted by the informant/opposite party no.2, police registered Mirzacheuki P.S. Case No.13 of 2021 and took up investigation of the case. After completion of the investigation, police submitted Final Report and did not send up the accused person of the case for trial because of lack of evidence.
5. The complainant filed a protest-cum-complaint case which was registered as P.C.R. Case No.500 of 2022 and in the said case basing upon the protest-cum-complaint petition, statement on solemn affirmation of the complainant-informant and the statement of three enquiry witnesses, the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj has found sufficient material to proceed against the petitioners; as already indicated above.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners drawing attention of this Court to the unimpeachable documents i.e. the certified copy of the judgment passed by the Family Court, Bhagalpur in Matrimonial Case No.269 of 2018 dated 17.08.2019, submits that the Hindu Marriage between the petitioner no.1 and the informant/opposite party no.2 has been dissolved by the decree of divorce vide the said judgment dated 17.08.2019 and on and from 17.08.2019, the informant/opposite party no.2 has ceased to be the wife of the petitioner no.1.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners next drawing attention of this Court to Annexure-8 of the brief, which is the web copy of the order of Hon’ble Patna High Court, submits that though the informant/opposite party no.2 filed Misc. Apppeal No.15 of 2021 in the High Court of Judicature at Patna, but vide order dated 17.11.2022, the complainant has withdrawn the said misc. appeal as the issues between the parties have already been settled, accordingly, the said Misc. Appeal No.15 of 2021 is dismiss as withdrawn.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners further drawing attention of this Court to Annexure-9, which is the copy of the certificate issued by the Marriage Officer, Bhagalpur, submits that the petitioner no.1 married the petitioner no.2 on 25.07.2020 and the same has been registered under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act on 18.08.2021.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioners next submit that there is no allegation anywhere against the petitioner no.1 of having committed an
Dissolution of marriage eliminates any continuing legal obligations or liabilities, impacting the feasibility of criminal charges based on prior conduct.
The court held that the evidence provided by the informant, including witness statements and marriage documentation, substantiates the allegations of cruelty and fraud against the petitioner.
Charges cannot proceed without substantiation of essential elements; mere allegations are insufficient to maintain criminal prosecution.
The court upheld the prima facie case against the petitioner for cruelty and dowry demand, rejecting claims of false allegations and mechanical charge framing.
High Court under Section 482 CrPC cannot quash proceedings where specific allegations of cruelty, dowry demands, assaults and harassment prima facie constitute offences; no evidence appreciation at t....
Proceedings quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as allegations failed to establish essential ingredients of Sections 323, 406, 498A IPC—no entrustment, hurt, or coercive harassment—disclosing abuse of ....
Mere allegations of domestic cruelty must be specific; generalized claims against family members without evidence should not form the basis of prosecution.
A mere breach of contract does not amount to cheating under Section 420 IPC unless there is evidence of dishonest intention from the inception of the transaction.
A mere breach of contract does not amount to cheating unless there is an intention to deceive from the inception of the agreement; allegations of insult and intimidation must meet specific legal thre....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.