Radhika Devi And ANR v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28067 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2017 Thana- JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Dilip Kumar Sanjit S/o Dharmdeo Prasad, R/o Mohalla- Bari Co-Operative Colony, House No.234, P.S.- Sector 12, Bokaro Steel City, District- Bokaro Jharkhand.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
State Of Bihar 2.
Sruti Kumari W/o Dilip Kumar Sanjit, D/o Late Laxman Saran Singh, At present resident of Vill.P.O.- Babhana, P.S. District- Jehanabad. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 27226 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-17 Thana- JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.
Radhika Devi, Wife of Dharmdeo Prasad.
2.
Dharmdeo Prasad, son of Bhuneshwar Mahto, Both resident of MohallaBari Co-operative Coloney, House No. 234, P.S.- Sector 12, Bokaro Steel City, District- Bokaro Jharkhand.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
State Of Bihar 2.
Sruti Kumari, Wife of Dilip Kumar Sanjit, daughter of Late Laxman Saran Singh, at present resident of Village P.O.- Babhana, P.S. District- Jehanabad. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 28067 of 2018) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Indu Shekhar Dwivedi, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Sri Shantanu Kumar, APP For Opposite Party No.2 :
Mr. Bindeshwar Prasad Singh, Advocate (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 27226 of 2018) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Indu Shekhar Dwivedi, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Sri Shantanu Kumar, APP For Opposite Party No.2 :
Mr. Bindeshwar Prasad Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28067 of 2018(4) dt.03-02-2026 2/2 03-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for O.P. No. 2 and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The present petitions have been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order 09.08.2017 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad in Complaint Case No. 12 of 2017 by which cognizance was taken against the petitioners under Sections 498(A), 323, 379, 406 & 120B of the I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that these cases have become infructuous, accordingly, the same may be disposed of.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State has no objection to this prayer of the petitioners.
5. Considering the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties, the aforesaid cases are disposed of having become infructuous.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J) rakhi/- U T