High CourtsSingle Bench(2006) 05 PAT CK 0085

Rajeev Ranjan @ Rajeev Ranjan Priyadarshi and Another vs The State of Bihar and Another

Patna High Court · Decided on 16 May 2006 · Citation: (2006) 4 PLJR 14

HON’BLE JUDGES
J.N. Bhatt, C.J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 10658 of 2005

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

4 paragraphs · 305 words

Dr. J.N. Bhatt, C.J.—This is an application u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, "the Code"), by which the petitioners have made a prayer for quashing the First Information Report of Budha Colony P.S. Case No. 137 of 2003 registered under Sections 498A, 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. In this petition the petitioner No. 1 Rajeev Ranjan @ Rajeev Ranjan Priyadarshi is the husband of the informant and so far this petitioner is concerned, it cannot be said that the complaint does not disclose any offence or the charges u/s 498A of the Indian Penal Code against him.

2.

However, the only contention, which is advanced, is with regard to quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner No. 2, the mother-in-law of the informant. It is submitted that there is no any averment or allegation which could disclose any offences against the petitioner No. 2. This submission is, also, not countenanced by the learned Counsel appearing for the State.

3.

Whatever the statement is made in the F.I.R, against the petitioner No. 2 the mother-in-law, does not at all constitute any offence. In this set of circumstances, this is a fit and appropriate case to exercise the inherent power of this Court interfering and quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner No. 2, the mother-in-law of the informant.

4.

So far the petitioner No. 1, the husband, is concerned, there is a prima facie case and offence is disclosed against him. Hence, his prayer for quashing the criminal proceeding shall stand rejected. In the result, the present application in so far as petitioner No. 1, the husband, is concerned, shall stand dismissed and in so far as the petitioner No. 2 Pushpalata Devi, the mother-in-law of the informant, is concerned shall stand allowed.