Patna High CourtCR. MISC./46395/2013allowed

Veena Devi And ORS. v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2016-12-07Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.46395 of 2013 =====================================

1. Veena Devi W/O Sri Birbal Chaurasia, D/O Of Birbal Chourasia Resident Of VillageMaheshkuth, P.S.- Maheshkuth, District- Khagaria.

2. Birbal Chourasia Son Of Late Mahadeo Chaudhary Resident Of VillageMaheshkuth, P.S.- Maheshkuth, District- Khagaria.

3. Sanoj Kumar @ Sanoj Chourasia Son Of Birbal Chaurasia Resident Of VillageMaheshkuth, P.S.- Maheshkuth, District- Khagaria.

4. Uday Kumar @ Uday Chourasia Son Of Birbal Chourasia Resident Of VillageMaheshkuth, P.S.- Maheshkuth, District- Khagaria.

5. Rupam Kumari @ Rupam Devi Daughter Of Birbal Chourasia Resident Of VillageMaheshkuth, P.S.- Maheshkuth, District- Khagaria.

6. Reshmi Kumari @ Puso Devi Daughter Of Birbal Chourasia Resident Of VillageMaheshkuth, P.S.- Maheshkuth, District- Khagaria.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Ganga Devi D/O Yogendra Ram, Wife Of Birendra Das Resident Of Village- Bachauta, P.S.- Morkahi, DistrictKhagaria. .... .... Opposite Party/s ===================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mayanand Jha (App) ===================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-12-2016 Heard.

This application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No. 145 (C) of 2013, registered for the offence punishable under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46395 of 2013 (5) dt.07-12-2016 2/2 The present petitioners are the relatives including parents of the husband of the complainant.

Learned counsel for the petitioners appears to be right in his submission that so far as these petitioners are concerned, there is vague allegation of demand of dowry against them in the complaint petition.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant has informed that the complainant is living in her matrimonial house.

Considering the nature of allegation against these petitioners in the complaint petition, I consider it fit in the ends of justice to quash the criminal proceeding, arising out of Complaint Case No. 145 (C) of 2013, to the extent the same relates to these petitioners.

This application is, accordingly, allowed.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Praveen-II/- U T