Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45256/2011allowed

Anil Jaishwal And ANR. v. The State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-08-30Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45256 of 2011 Arising Out of Complaint Case No. -1220 Year- 2009 Thana -Bhabua District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ===========================================================

1. Anil Jaishwal S/o Sita Ram Jaiswal, resident of Mohalla - Chaman Lal Pokhara Ward No.17, P.S.- Bhabua, District- Kaimur at Bhabua.

2. Saroj Devi W/o Anil Jaishwal, resident of Mohalla - Chaman Lal Pokhara Ward No.17, P.S.- Bhabua, District- Kaimur at Bhabua. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Priti Jaishwal @ Guriya @ Arati wife of Saurabh Kumar Jaishwal @ Chintu, daughter of Din Dayal Prasad, resident of mohalla-Chuman Lal Pokhara, PSBhabua, District-Bhabua at Sasaram. .... .... Opposite Party/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : M/s Manoj Kumar and Pawan Kumar Singh, Advs. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Humayu Ahmad Khan, APP =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 30-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The Petitioners, who are the uncle and aunt of the husband of Opposite Party No.2, seek quashing of the order of cognizance dated 5.4.2010 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram in Complaint case No.1220 of 2009. The case of the Complainant is that she was married with one Sourabh Jaishwal on 21.11.2007, whereafter she went to her matrimonial home. However, the in-laws including the petitioners started to torture her and she was finally ousted from the matrimonial

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45256 of 2011 dt.30-08-2017 2/2 home.

It has been submitted on behalf of the Petitioners that on going through the Complaint Petition apart from general and vague allegation with regard to torture there is no specific material against them. Moreover it is impossible to believe that a person who would be married in the year 2007 would be tortured for ends of dowry even after birth of a child. The parents of husband have filed Criminal Miscellaneous No. 31776 of 2012, which was allowed by a coordinate Bench of this Court on 30.06.2015 and cognizance with respect to parents-in-law of the opposite party no. 2 was quashed. Having considered the vague nature of allegations against the petitioners in the complaint petition which indicates some dispute between the spouses, the application is allowed and the order of cognizance dated 05.04.

2010 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram in Complaint case No.1220 of 2009 is hereby set aside as far as the petitioners are concerned. However, this order shall have no bearing on the prosecution of the husband. (Sanjay Kumar, J) Mahesh/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 04.09.2017 Transmission Date 04.09.