Mridula Kumari v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47804 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-589 Year-2016 Thana- SITAMARHI COMPLAINT CASE District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Mridula Kumari Daughter of Nagendra Prasad Gupta, Resident of VillageRiga Mill Chawk, Police Station- Riga, District- Sitamarhi Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

State Of Bihar 2.

Sonam Kumari, Wife of Ashok Kumar, Resident of Village- Riga Mill Chawk, Police Station- Riga, District- Sitamarhi Bihar. at present of VillageCakhni, Police Station- Bagha, District- West Champaran. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-06-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The present quashing application has been filed for quashing the order dated 27.06.2016 passed by the learned SubDivisional Magistrate, Sadar, Sitamarhi in Complaint CI-589 of 2016 whereby cognizance under Section 498A of the I.P.C. read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act has been taken. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is married sister-in-law of the complainant. It is next submitted that by order dated 10.07.2018 notices were issued upon the Opposite Party No. 2 and the same was filed within time as directed by the said order.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47804 of 2017(4) dt.30-06-2022 2/3 Learned counsel for the petitioner further draws the attention of the Court to the Office Notes dated 18.01.2019 wherein it has been recorded that "earlier notices under both process was issued upon the Opposite Party No.2 and ordinary notice upon Opposite Party No.2 could not be served upon her as per report of process server that mother of O.P. No.2 refused to acknowledge the same stating that there has been a compromise between her daughter and son-in-law and both of them are living together, so a copy of the notices was hanged on the door. The undeliverable registered cover has yet not been received as per computer verification R-Net tracking report shows the status as consignment details not found". Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on Section 65 of the Cr.P.C. to submit that the service of notice be deemed to be valid for the reason that a copy of the summon was affixed on the door of the house of the O.P. No.2 since her mother refused to accept the summon.

In view of the Office report dated 18.01.2019 since the mother of the O.P. No. 2 herself has refused to accept the notice on the ground that the Opposite Party No.2 and her husband have compromised and are staying together as such continuation of the case against the present petitioner who is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47804 of 2017(4) dt.30-06-2022 3/3 married sister-in-law of the complainant would be an abuse of the process of the Court.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the quashing application.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the notice report dated 18.01.2019, the order dated 27.06.2016 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Sitamarhi in Complaint Case No. CI-589 of 2016 is hereby quashed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T