High CourtsSingle Bench(2024) 07 PAT CK 1544

Suyash Siddhant vs State of Bihar

Patna High Court · Decided on 7 July 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Chandra Shekhar Jha, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No.57640 Of 2024

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 · 683 words

Chandra Shekhar Jha, J

1.

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2.

The present petition is being filed on behalf of the petitioners for quashing of cognizance order dated 16.11.2022 learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Patna Sadar in Mahila P.S. Case No. 153 of 2021 by which learned trial court took cognizance for the offence u/s 498 (A), 341, 323, 406, 504 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and Section 3, 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3.

As  per  the  case  of  prosecution  O.P.  No.  2 married to petitioner on 29.01.2020 according to Hindu rites and customs. It is further alleged that her father-in-law demanded Rs. 15,00,000/- in order to marry his daughter, which was paid by her parent but later on she came to know that her sister-in-law was already married. It is further stated that petitioner/ husband was on medication for some mental illness and was also short tempered and of dominating nature. Her in-laws used to instigate the petitioner/ husband against her and also used to stop the O.P. No. 2 from talking to her parents. The petitioner used to sought at O.P. No. 2. It is further stated that on 26.09.2020 the brother of O.P. No. 2 came to house of accused persons in order to take O.P. No. 2 to her naihar (parental home) but he was ill-treated by the petitioner, and also tried to assault her brother by lathi. However the O.P. No. 2 managed to take some cloths and her Jewelry and reached her naihar. It is alleged that her mobile phone was left behind in her matrimonial home by mistake, from where accused persons shared some personal photos and Whatsapp chat with others. The O.P. No. 2 further stated that the petitioner and others did not give her any money for her expanses and she had to ask her parents for the same. The accused persons used to conspire against O.P. No. 2 and threatened to dissolve her marriage with petitioner/ husband.

4.

Without exploring the available merits, it is straightway submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the dispute between the parties settled amicably where both the parties decided to dissolve their marriage as per provisions available under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against permanent alimony of Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakh). It is submitted that acting upon the compromise parties preferred petition for mutual divorce under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna pending as Matrimonial (Divorce) Case No. 483 of 2025, which filed on 24.04.2025. It is also pointed out that in terms of compromise further payment of Rs. 5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakh) was made to O.P. No. 2 before the learned trial/ family court through bank demand draft no. 436059 dated 17.04.2025 drawn at Kotak Mahindra Bank, Patliputra Housing Colony, Patna and as such a total payment of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh) already made to O.P. No. 2 in terms of compromise. It is submitted that the balance of payment of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh) shall be made to O.P. No. 2 by petitioner/husband at the time of second motion.

5.

Mr. Shailendra Kr. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the O.P. No. 2 also approved the factum of compromise as submitted above and also the payment qua receiving of Rs. 10,00,000/- ( Rupees Ten Lakh) . It is jointly submitted that no any other criminal case including maintenance case is pending between the parties.

6.

Considering the aforesaid factual submissions as the parties amicably resolved their issues and differences as discussed aforesaid, continuing present criminal proceeding before the learned court below would only amount to abuse of the process of court of law and, therefore, impugned cognizance order dated 16.11.2022 as passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Patna Sadar in Mahila P.S. Case No. 153 of 2021 qua all accused persons including petitioner is hereby quashed/ set aside with all its consequential proceedings.

7.

Accordingly, the petition stands allowed.

8.

Let a copy of the judgment be sent to the learned trial court forthwith.