Dhanjeet Giri v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 42713 of 2010 Arising out of P.S. Case No. -269 Year- 2008 Thana - Khajanchi Hat District- Purnea ========================================================
1. Vinay Kumar Verma Son of Late Mahendra Lal Das Resident of Nandan Niketan, Mohalla Nauratan Hatta, P.S. Khajanchi Hat, Distt. Purnea.
2. Bindu Shekhar @ Vidhu Shekhar @ Banti Son of Vinay Kumar Verma Resident Of Nandan Niketan, Mohalla Nauratan Hatta, P.S. Khajanchi Hat, Distt. Purnea.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s with ======================================================== Criminal Miscellaneous No. 42712 of 2010 Arising out of P.S. Case No. -269 Year- 2008 Thana - Khajanchi Hat District- Purnea ======================================================== Dhanjeet Giri Son of Deshav Kumari Giri Resident of Village Koshi Colony, P.S. K. Hat, District Purnea.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ======================================================== Appearance :
(In Cr.Misc. No. 42713 of 2010) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anirudh Kumar Sinha, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s: Mr. C. Jawahar, APP. (In Cr.Misc. No. 42712 of 2010) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anirudh Kumar Sinha, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s: Mr. C. Jawahar, APP. ======================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 28-03-2016 No one appears on behalf of the Opposite Party No. 2.
The Petitioners who are the in-laws and friend of the husband of the Opposite Party No. 2 seek quashing of the order dated 09.07.2010 passed by the Chief
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42713 of 2010 dt.28-03-2016 Judicial Magistrate, Purnea in Khajanchi Hat P.S. Case No. 269 of 2008.
The case of the Informant is that she was married to Indu Shekhar @ Rinku on 11.05.2005 thereafter she came to her matrimonial home but she was tortured for ends of dowry thereafter she left her matrimonial home.
It has been submitted on behalf of the Petitioners that fact of the matter is that the Complainant did not want to live in her matrimonial home and had made unexpected demands of her husband which could not be fulfilled and, hence, the present case. The Petitioners used to live separate and had no concern with the affairs of the in-laws.
On going through the First Information Report, I find that the allegations are absurd as also unbelievable as against the present Petitioners and, hence, the proceeding including the order dated 09.07.2010 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea in Khajanchi Hat P.S. Case No. 269 of 2008 is, hereby, set aside so far as the Petitioners are concerned.
The Applications stand allowed.
Vikash/- (Anjana Prakash, J.) U T