Anand Kumar Singh @ Bablu And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.38024 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1074 Year- 2013 Thana -ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSASARAM (ROHTAS) ===========================================================

1. Anand Kumar Singh @ Bablu S/o Sri Bhagwan Singh

2. Sri Bhagawan Singh S/o Late Ramadhar Singh

3. Smt. Shushila Devi W/o Sri Bhagwan Sah All resident of village- Tekari, P.S.- Kargahar, District- Rohtas .... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Rishikesh Singh S/o Late Raghubansh Singh resident of village- Sadokhar, P.S.- Chenari, District- Rohtas

3. Rambha Singh, wife of Anand Kuamr Singh @ Bablu, resident of villageTekari, P.S.- Karghar, District- Rohtas, at present resident of village- Sadokhar, P.S.- Chenari, District- Rohtas.

.... .... Opposite Parties =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Devendra Narayan Singh, Advocate For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Rakesh Narayan Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ajay Kumar-I, A.P.P. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 07-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2 and the State.

2.

The petitioners seek quashing of order dated23.5.2014 passed by S.D.J.M., Sasaram in Complaint Case No.1074 of 2013 whereby taking cognizance of the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38024 of 2014 dt.07-08-2017 2/3

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that after marriage, the complainant used to live at Ranchi with her husband. This fact is also mentioned in the complaint petition as the husband was engaged as a L.I.C. agent but the parents lived at village home. There is no specific allegation against father-in-law and mother-in-law, petitioner nos.1 and 2 relating to any specific demand of dowry after the marriage or torture in that connection; whereas learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2 submits that there is general allegation against the father-in-law and motherin-law and on their instigation the husband used to torture his wife.

4. Having considered rival submission and on perusal of record, it appears that the allegation of making demand of dowry as well as committing cruelty or harassment to the complainant by petitioners 2 and 3 is general and omnibus. The complaint itself shows that after marriage she used to reside with her husband at Ranchi whereas her in-laws resided at village home. Now it is settled principle of law that in absence of any specific allegation against the relatives of the husband they should not be prosecuted. In the present case also there is no specific allegation against father-in-law and mother-in-law petitioner nos.2 and 3 respectively though there is specific allegation against the husband petitioner no.1 of this application, so the criminal proceeding along with cognizance order

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38024 of 2014 dt.07-08-2017 3/3 dated 23.5.2014 passed by S.D.J.M., Sasaram in Complaint Case No.1074 of 2013 with respect to petitioners 2 and 3 only, namely, Sri Bhagawan Singh and Smt. Shushila Devi are hereby set aside whereas the trial will proceed in accordance with law against the husband petitioner no.1.

5. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of. (Arun Kumar, J) N.H./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 08-09-2017 Transmission Date 08-09-2017