Prem Prakash Verma @ Sunil Kumar Singh v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54391 of 2013 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -113 Year- 2008 Thana -HASPURA District- AURANGABAD ===========================================================

1. Prem Prakash Verma @ Sunil Kumar Singh S/O Late Hari Narayan Singh, Resident Of Village- Purhara, P.S.- Haspura, Distt.- Aurangabad .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Ramwati Devi W/O Prem Prakash Verma, D/O Late Kamal Singh, Resident Of Village- Ramlagan Bigha, P.S.- Parasi, Distt.- Arwal at Present Birjupur, P.S.- Kurth, Distt.- Arwal .... .... Opposite Party/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bindeshwar Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 23-07-2015 Supplementary Affidavit filed on behalf of the Petitioner stating therein that the Opposite Party No.2 has remarried and is living in another place, be kept on the record. The Petitioner, who is the husband of the Informant, seeks quashing of the order of cognizance dated 18.3.2009 passed by the S.D.J.M., Daudnagar in Haspura P.S. case No.113 of 2008 (G.R. No.952 of 2008 Trial No.226 of 2013).

The case of the Informant is that she was married to the Petitioner about two years ago and she lived in her matrimonial home for a month. Thereafter she returned to her parental home and when once again she came to her matrimonial home she was assaulted for

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54391 of 2013 dt.23-07-2015 2/2 ends of dowry and thereafter turned out from there. It has been submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that in fact the Informant was not happy with the Petitioner because he was merely a labourer and there was no question of torture being meted out to her. The Petitioner himself had no parents and has only a brother who is separate in mess. In such circumstances, there was no reason why the Informant could have ever grouse against the Petitioner. The further submission is that the Informant is not taking interest in the matter.

Notices had been issued to the Opposite Party No.2 but none appears on her behalf.

Considering the submission of the Petitioner, the application is allowed and the proceeding including the order of cognizance dated 18.3.2009 passed by the S.D.J.M., Daudnagar in Haspura P.S. case No.113 of 2008 (G.R. No.952 of 2008 Trial No.226 of 2013) is hereby set aside.

(Anjana Prakash, J) Narendra/- U T