IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr.M.P. No. 194 of 2024

1. Dobair Ahmad Siddique @ Dobair Ahamad, aged about 67 years,

s/o Amdullah Siddiqui

2. Khushnama Begum @ K. Khatoon, aged about 62 years, w/o Dobair

Ahmad Siddique

Both are resident of Village-Manpur, P.O. & P.S.-Khaira, Dist.-Saran

(Bihar)

.... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Anvar Ali Khan, s/o Marhum Abdul Hakim, resident of House

No.16, Tetulmari, Sijua Area No.04, P.O. & P.S.-Jogta, Dist.-

Dhanbad (Jharkhand) …. Opp. Parties

P R E S E N T

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

…..

For the Petitioners : Mr. Ramchender Sahu, Advocate

: Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate

For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, Addl. P.P.

For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Zaid Ahmed, Advocate

: Ms. Ashna Khanam, Advocate

…..

By the Court:-

1. Heard the parties.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the

jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 12.10.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Jogta P.S. Case No. 42 of 2022, corresponding to G.R. No.1793 of 2023 whereby and where under,

the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 304B, 306 and 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners also even though they were not sent up for trial, by deferring with the charge sheet.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the case is still pending for appearance of the petitioners and trial is yet to begin.

4. The brief fact of the case is that the petitioners are the accused persons of the said Jogta P.S. Case No. 42 of 2022. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner no. 1 and 2 are respectively the father-in-law and mother-in-law and in furtherance of common intention with their son who is the husband of the victim- Subi Khatoon committed the dowry death of Subi Khatoon. The undisputed fact remains that Subi Khatoon solemnized marriage with the son of the petitioner on 03.05.2017 and she died on 26.07.2022 otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of the marriage and there was allegation that soon before her death, she was subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband and the petitioners in connection with demand of dowry.

5. In the charge sheet submitted in the case only against the husband of the victim lady and he only was sent up for trial whereas the petitioners and two others whose descriptions were shown in column 12 of the charge sheet, were not sent up for trial because of insufficiency of evidence against them. The learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad took note of the materials available in the record that after marriage Subi Khatoon was treated with cruelty in connection with unlawful demand of Rs.20,00,000/-. To coerce to her to meet the said unlawful demand she was abused and assaulted and her husband threatened her of solemnizing second marriage with another woman. The learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad considered the statement of the father of the deceased appearing in paragraph no. 4 of the case diary wherein he has categorically stated that inter alia the petitioners being the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased were continuously harassing the deceased victim, for fulfilment of demand of dowry of Rs.20,00,000/- soon before her death. The postmortem report revealed that the deceased died because of hanging. The learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad also considered the statement of the informant and independent witnesses also to the effect that they have stated about the dowry demand made after the marriage and the deceased was repeatedly assaulted in connection with unlawful demand of dowry. The witnesses whose statement appearing in paragraph no. 6, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of the case diary have stated about the informant being subjected to cruelty in connectio