The court reaffirmed that even in family disputes, ongoing allegations of abuse, intimidation, and theft warrant legal scrutiny and cannot be dismissed due to prior complaints, emphasizing the need for proper judicial review.

CAV JUDGMENT

Date : 19-12-2025

Heard Mr. Anshul, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners duly assisted by Ms. Tooba Hera and Mr. Pratyush and learned Senior counsel for the opposite party, Mr. Bindhaychal Singh duly assisted by Mr. Sanjeev Saran in all the three cases as also learned APPs, Mr. Pranav Kumar, Mr. Jitendra Kr. Singh and Mr. Umanath Mishra for the State.

(A) FACTS OF THE CASES:

(i) Cr. Misc. No. 45169 of 2024

2. The present petition has been preferred:

“for the quashing of the order dated 15.09.2022 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Patna in connection with Complaint Case No. 5992(C) of 2022, in which cognizance has been taken against the petitioners herein under sections 354(C), 504 and 506/34 of the I.P.C.”

3. The opposite party no. 2 namely, Sushma Sinha filed complaint case before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, vide Complaint Case No. 5992(C) of 2022 on 23.05.2022 alleging that:

(i) the complainant's son, namely Rohit Prakash got married to Anushree Srivastava (petitioner no. 1) on 06.12.2020 as per Hindu rituals and customs. Her parents expressed their unwillingness to spend money on their daughter's marriage, they being financially not strong. The complainant and her family members inturn assured them that they were against dowry and would proceed with the marriage with the limited expense;

(ii) also, the complainant and her family members gifted expensive items as well as gold & silver jewelleries to the lady and her family. A day after the after the marriage, the petitioner no. 1 and complainant's son came back to Patna, where the complainant's home is situated. The allegation is that within two days, the petitioner no. 1’s behaviour became rude and she refused to perform the marriage rituals;

(iii) further allegation is that during the four days stay at her home in Patna, the petitioner no. 1 always made unpleasant comment on her as also her husband. Later, on 11th/12th December, 2020, the petitioner no. 1 with the complaint's son went to Pune, where the complainant's son was working. There she started pressurising the complainant's son to leave his parents and to sell the house situated in Patna so that they could buy a big flat in Pune as the petitioner no. 1 wanted to keep her parents with them;

(iv) she also disclosed that her father, Rajesh Chandra Srivastava (petitioner no. 2) forcibly married her to him despite the fact that she is a mental patient. Later, the petitioner no. 1 actually suffered a mental attack in Pune. The complainant's son on 07.01.2021 took her to a Doctor. Thereafter, for detailed medical examination, the complainant's son sent the petitioner no. 1 to Patna on 12.01.2021 as the complainant's husband is a Doctor;

(v) the complainant further alleged that when she informed the petitioner no. 1's mother on phone about the ill-health of her daughter, both the lady as and the petitioner no. 2 also started abusing the complainant and her husband and made vile and unpleasant remarks. During her stay at Patna, the petitioner no. 1 also displayed wild and abusive behavior/act towards the complainant;

(vi) further allegation is that in the month of February, 2021, when the petitioner no. 1's parents visited the complainant's home, they started instigating the petitioner no. 1. Also, the petitioner no. 2 started abusing the complainant's husband and called him a quack and questioned his medical degree in front of his patients and people in locality. The petitione