Niraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46102 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-414 Year-2022 Thana- DELHA District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Niraj Kumar S/O Mohan Yadav R/O Mohalla Chotki Delha Gusalkhana Road, Ps. Delha, Dist. Gaya 2.

Pankaj Kumar S/O Mohan Yadav R/O Mohalla Chotki Delha Gusalkhana Road, Ps. Delha, Dist. Gaya 3.

Vivek Kumar S/O Mohan Yadav R/O Mohalla Chotki Delha Gusalkhana Road, Ps. Delha, Dist. Gaya 4.

Mohan Yadav S/O Late Sitaram Yadav R/O Mohalla Chotki Delha Gusalkhana Road, Ps. Delha, Dist. Gaya 5.

Chandramuni Devi W/O Mohan Yadav R/O Mohalla Chotki Delha Gusalkhana Road, Ps. Delha, Dist. Gaya 6.

Mamta Kumari @ Mamta Devi W/O Bijendra Yadav R/O Raghunathpur, Ps. Naubatpur, Dist. Patna 7.

Bijendra Kumar @ Bijendra Yadav S/O Late Ramswroop Yadav R/O Raghunathpur, Ps. Naubatpur, Dist. Patna 8.

Ram Kumar @ Ramji Yadav S/O Nawal Yadav R/O Mohalla- Bangali Bigha, Ps. Chandauli, Dist. Gaya 9.

Neha Kumari @ Pooja Kumari W/O Ram Kumar @ Ramji Yadav R/O Mohalla- Bangali Bigha, Ps. Chandauli, Dist. Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Priti Kumari W/O Niranjan Kumar R/O Village- Chotki Delha, Gushalkhana Road, Ps. Delha, Dist. Gaya ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ansul, Sr. Advocate Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ritesh kumar, Advocate Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-09-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners; learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned APP for the State.

2/5

2. The present application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the order dated 18.04.2023 passed in Delha P.S. Case No. 414 of 2022 by the learned J.M. 1st Class, Gaya, whereby cognizance has been taken under Sections 341, 323, 379, 504, 498A/34 of the IPC and Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. The allegation is of subjecting the opposite party no.2 to various sorts of torture due to non-fulfillment of the demand of the dowry.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the learned District Court, in the most mechanical manner, without applying his judicial mind that the matter is purely civil in nature and without considering the material available on record, has taken cognizance against the petitioners, which cannot sustain in the eye of law. Learned counsel further submitted that marriage is a sacred ceremony but little matrimonial skirmish suddenly erupts into hatred and the parties ponder to reconcile their dispute outside the court. He further submitted that matter be referred for mediation.

5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned APP jointly submitted that opportunity shall be given to the parties to reconcile their dispute amicably.

3/5

6. Heard the parties.

7. Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, I find that the parties have failed to settle the matrimonial dispute, the Court till last minute must strive to give opportunity to the parties to settle the dispute between the husband and wife amicably. The matrimonial dispute is not an offense against the society rather a matrimonial dispute is a private conflict between spouses and does not inherently constitute an offence against society. However, a false case can have a disastrous consequence in absence of any criminal content. The personal dispute cannot call for a criminal offence. Continuation of the proceeding would amount to abuse of process of law leading to vexatious proceeding against the petitioners.

8. In this regard, the Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, reported in, (2003) 4 SCC 675, in paragraph nos. 12 and 13 has held as under:- " 12. The special features in such matrimonial matters are evident. It becomes the duty of the court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes.

13. The observations made by this Court, though in a slightly different context, in G.V. Rao v. L.H.V. Prasad [(2000) 3 SCC 693 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 733] are very apt for determining the approach required to be kept in view in a matrimonial dispute by the courts. It was said that there has been an outburst of matrimonial disputes

4/5 in recent times. Marriage is a sacred ceremony, the main purpose of which is to enable the young couple to settle down in life and live peacefully. But little matrimonial skirmishes suddenly erupt which often assume serious proportions resulting in commission of heinous crimes in which elders of the family are also involved with the result that those who could have counselled and brought about rapprochement are rendered helpless on their being arrayed as accused in the criminal case. There are many other reasons which need not be mentioned here for not encouraging matrimonial litigation so that the parties may ponder over their defaults and terminate their disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead of fighting it out in a court of law where it takes years and years to conclude and in that process the parties lose their "young" days in chasing their "cases" in different courts.

9. Both the parties are agreed to settle the dispute outside the Court and they have willingly desired to appear before the learned District Court on 07.10.2025 at 10:30 AM.

10. Learned District Court is directed to take necessary action to refer the matter before the learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center.

11. Learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center concerned shall make his/her best efforts to settle the dispute amicably and thereafter submit his/her report before the concerned learned District Court, well within a period of four months, till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners in connection with the aforesaid case.

12. In case of failure on the part of the petitioners to

5/5 appear on 07.10.2025 before the learned District Court or any date fixed by the learned Mediator, the interim protection granted to the petitioners shall automatically lose its force.

13. In case, the parties fail to reconcile, then in that case, the learned District Court shall proceed with the trial.

14. In case, the parties resolve their dispute amicably, then the proceeding is required to be dropped in light of the law laid down by the Apex Court as referred hereinabove.

15. Accordingly, the present quashing application stands disposed of.

(Purnendu Singh, J) Niraj/- U T