Kalamuddin Sheikh And ANR. v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.5818 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -687 Year- 2012 Thana -ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSASARAM (ROHTAS) ===========================================================
1. Kalamuddin Sheikh Son Of Shaikh Zahir Resident Of Village - Mahuraon (Banjari) P.S. Rohtas, District - Rohtas
2. Jubida Khatoon Wife Of Kamaluddin Sheikh Resident Of Village - Mahuraon (Banjari) P.S. Rohtas, District - Rohtas .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Rubina Khatoon Wife Of Mokhtar Ansari Resident Of Village - Bajari, P.O.- Banjari, P.S.- Rohtas, District - Rohtas .... .... Opposite Party/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 05-04-2016 The petitioners who are the parents in-law seek quashing of the order of cognizance dated 16.08.2013 passed in Complaint Case No. 687 of 2012.
The case of the complainant is that she was married to Mokhtar Ansari but when she came to her matrimonial home she was tortured for ends of dowry. She also learnt that her husband had remarried. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the entire allegation has been leveled to extort money from them. The fact is that the complainant while cooking meal got burn injury and she was admitted in private hospital in an unconscious position where the entire expenses of treatment was borne by the petitioners in absence
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5818 of 2014 dt.05-04-2016 2/2 of her husband who was working abroad and ensured that she became well. This fact has been supported by herself in Annexure 3 also. In such circumstances, the complaint appears to be unbelievable. Considering the aforesaid fact and the relationship of the petitioners with the complainant, the application is allowed and the order of cognizance dated 16.08.2013 passed in Complaint Case No. 687 of 2012, is hereby set aside so far as the petitioners are concerned. (Anjana Prakash, J) Prakash/- U T