Sunaina Devi And ANR v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13035 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2447 Year-2016 Thana- BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CASE District- Begusarai ====================================================== 1.

Sunaina Devi and Anr Wife of Raunak Kumar, Resident of VillageVikrampur, P.S. Cheria Bariarpur, District Begusarai. 2.

Ramesh Rai, Son of Late Rangdeo Rai Resident of Village-Chatra, P.S. Muffassil, District-Khagaria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

State Of Bihar and Anr 2.

Raunak Kumar, Son of Sanjay Singh, Resident of Village-Vikrampur, P.S. Cheria Bariarpur, District Begusarai.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 19-01-2023 Heard Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned counsel for the State.

This case was taken up at 10.30 A.M., when no one appeared. Once again, at 12.00 P.M. on call, no one appeared for the petitioner.

The petitioner moved before this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order dated 20.2.2017 passed by Judicial Magistrate, IInd Class, Begusarai in Complaint Case No. 2447 (C) of 2016 by which the cognizance has been taken against the petitioners under Sections 341, 323, 452 of the IPC.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13035 of 2018(2) dt.19-01-2023 2/2 As per the prosecution story, the complainant has made allegation against his wife and fater-in-law of having come to his house on the pretext of compromise and later in the morning decamped with the jewellery worth Rs. 4 lakh as also Rs. 25,000/- after breaking the almirah.

Learned Court thereafter took up the matter and vide order dated 20.2.2017 took cognizance in the matter necessitating the present petition.

From the complaint, it is clear that allegation has been made against the petitioners herein of having come to his house on the pretext of a compromise, stayed there in the night and later in the morning, left the place along with jewellery/amount as stated and when they went to in-laws' house to complain, they were also assaulted.

In view of the fact that the allegations are there against the petitioners and the learned Court has applied its mind taking cognizance, this Court does not think it a fit case for quashing and is accordingly dismissed.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Prakash Narayan /Ajay Singh/- U T