AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Even after valid service of notice upon Opposite Party No. 2, she has not chosen to appear before this Court and contest the application.
The petitioner has filed this application for quashing of the order taking cognizance dated 20.04.2016, pending before the Court of learned A.C.J.M., 5th Ara, Bhojpur, in connection with Complaint Case No. 2173C of 2015 (Trial No. 1426 of 2016) for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the I.P.C.
As per the prosecution case, the informant was married with the petitioner on 15.12.2014 according to Hindu customs and when she went to her matrimonial house, she found that the petitioner was already in relationship with one Rita Devi. Upon opposition by the complainant, it has been alleged that she was tortured and assaulted by the petitioner and other co-accused persons. It has further been alleged that all the co-accused persons including this petitioner tried to set her on fire and also snatched all her ornaments.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the plain reading of the complaint, goes to show that no offence under Section 498A is made out and the cognizance under Section 498A is bad in law and facts. It has further been submitted, referring to Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code particularly to the explanation of cruelty in the said Section that the ingredients thereof does not exist in the present case. It has further been submitted that the present prosecution against the petitioner is bad in law and facts both. It has further been submitted, referring to the several judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the cases of Achin Gupta vs. State of Haryana & Anr; reported in [2024] 6 S.C.R. 129, Nitin Ahluwalia vs. the State of Punjab; reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2013, Kailashben Mahendrabhai Patel & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., reported in 2024 INSC 737, that the allegation against the petitioner is malicious and vexatious one. It has further been submitted, referring to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, and several categories as discussed in paragraph-102 of the said judgment, that the present prosecution is malicious and vexatious one. It has further been submitted that the complainant is neither pursuing her case in the Court below as well as even after issuance of notice, the complainant has not chosen to appear before this Court and contest the case. It has further been submitted that the reason for non appearance is because of the fact that she has married someone else without taking divorce from the petitioner. It has further been submitted that the continuation of proceeding against the petitioner would be an abuse of the process of the Court.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer of the petitioner.
Heard the parties and perused the record.
Considering the facts and circumstances as well as the conduct of the Opposite Party No.2, the order taking cognizance dated 20.04.2016, pending before the Court of learned A.C.J.M., 5th Ara, Bhojpur, in connection with Complaint Case No. 2173C of 2015 (Trial No. 1426 of 2016), is hereby quashed.
The application stands allowed.