High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 08 PAT CK 1733

Md. Sakur vs State Of Bihar & Anr.

Patna High Court · Decided on 20 August 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Praveen Kumar, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13670 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 405 words

Date : 20-08-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2.

2.

The instant application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for quashing of the order dated 04.05.2015 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai by which cognizance came to be taken against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Begusrai Complaint Case No. 14678C of 2014.

3.

As per the prosecution case, the marriage of the complainant was solemnised with the petitioner ten years ago, and after living peacefully for two years in her matrimonial house, the accused persons started torturing her as regarding the non-fulfillment of the dowry demand of Rs. 50,000/- and a car. As a result of torture meted out to her, the complainant was ousted from her matrimonial house.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that this is the third case which the complainant has filed against the petitioner. The first case was filed in the year 2006, the second case was filed in the year 2011 and the present case was filed in the year 2014. It has further been submitted that the filing of multiple cases under Section 498(A), itself goes to show that the present complaint is nothing but malicious and vexatious one.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala and Ors. reported in (2001) 6 SCC 181 and has submitted that multiple cases themselves would suggest that the allegations have been purposely levelled out of malicious intent. It has further been submitted that the first case filed against the petitioner in 2006 was compromised between the parties whereas the remaining two cases including the present one are still pending.

6.

Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer of the petitioner.

7.

Heard the parties, and perused the records.

8.

Considering the multiplicity co-ordinated strategy to file separate complaints under the same provisions of the Indian Penal Code which is vexatious and malicious one, the continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner would amount to a gross abuse of the process of the Court. Consequently, the order taking cognizance dated 04.05.2015, passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Begusrai, is hereby quashed.

9.

Accordingly, the application stands allowed.