IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13568 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1090 Year-2021 Thana- MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Muzaffarpur ======================================================

Reena Devi @ Runa Devi @ Runa Kumari wife of Late Rajeev Kumar village- Mahnar, Ps- Mahnar, Dist- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Versa Rani Wife of Mukesh Kumar village- Rambag Chouri, Ps-

Mithanpura, dist- Muzaffarpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nafisu Zzoha, Advocate Ms. Shabina Talat, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Sanjay Kr. @ S.K., Advocate ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER

5 12-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for O.P. No. 2 and the learned APP for the State. 2. This application has been filed setting aside/quashing the cognizance order dated 04.09.2024 passed in Complaint Case No. 1090 of 2021 dated 07.06.2021 by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Muzaffarpur (East), whereby the learned Magistrate took cognizance under Sections 323 and 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The fact giving rise to the present application is to the effect that the petitioner lodged a complaint is that complainant and accused No. 1, i.e., husband, had solemnized marriage in year 2017 where demand of cash as gift has been made for purchasing flat, furniture, utensils, clothes and gold/

silver jewelleries were also gifted by family of complainant. Thereafter, accused persons raised demand of one kattha of land in Muzaffarpur and subsequently more demand was made for cash and other articles from time to time. The accused persons started torturing the complainant and upon complaint to Mahila Helpline by her they assured to keep her well but again after some time assaulted her and allegedly accused No.2 tried to kill her by pressing her neck after which she started screaming and was saved by people nearby. It is alleged that petitioner who is widow (wife of brother of accused No.1) had illicit relationship with accused No.1 and she saw them in objectionable condition. It is also alleged that brother of complainant was also assaulted when they questioned the accused people and they kept on demanding dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no offence as alleged by prosecution has been committed nor any such incident took place. It is further been submitted that complainant herself tortured the in-laws and deserted her matrimonial home. It is submission of petitioner that she is Jethani of complainant and lived separately unconcerned with family affairs. The allegation is only based on suspicion showing ill thought of complainant and absence of any particular incident renders the story unbelievable.

5. The learned APP vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing and setting aside the cognizance order against petitioner as allegations of adultery and assault are serious in nature.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records of the case, it is evident that the petitioner happens to be the widow sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the husband of the complainant. It has also been observed that from a plain reading of the FIR, it would be evident that the allegations of demand are stated to have started even prior to the marriage. The submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner being a widow and she happens to be the Jethani of the complainant she does not have anything to say with regard to household matters of her Devar, husband of the complainant and therefore lodging of the present complaint case against the petitioner amounts to abuse of the process of law. It has also been observed that merely on the statement, the ultimate averment of the complainant, the