Sudershan Pd. Singh And ORS. v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.661 of 2013 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -98 Year- 2012 Thana -ARA NAWADA District- - ===========================================================
1. Sudershan Pd. Singh son of Late Ramashraya Singh
2. Vineet Kumar @ Vineet Kr. Singh son of Sudershan Singh
3. Malti @ Malti Singh wife of Sudarshan Singh
4. Chanchal Singh @ Chanchal wife of Late Manoj Singh
5. Neelam Singh wife of Late Manoj Singh
6. Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Singh, son of Late Mithalesh Singh All are residents of Village- Kanti, P.S- Lalganj, District - Vaishali At present resident of House No.G-20/80 Sector-7, Muhall- Rohini, Delhi-110085 .... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Satyanarayan Singh son of Late Rajpati Singh, Resident of Vijay Bhawan, Muhalla - Maharaja Hata, P.S. - Ara Nawada, District- Bhojpur. .... .... Opposite Parties =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Dr. Alok Kumar Alok, Mr. Man Mohan Kumar, Advocates For the State : Dr. Mayanand Jha, APP For the O.P. : None =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 21-05-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned APP for the State.
2. The present application has been filed for quashing the first information report in connection with Ara Nawada P.S. case No.98 of 2012 registered for the offences under Sections 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act
3. It is submitted that there is subsequent development in the case whereby the parties have reconciled their disputes and
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.661 of 2013 dt.21-05-2015 2/3 differences in terms of a compromise, whereunder petitioner no.2 had agreed to pay an amount of Rs.11,00,000/- to the daughter of opposite party no.2, namely, Richa Rani @ Richa towards permanent alimony and maintenance in three instalments of Rs.5,00,000/-, Rs.3,00,000/- and Rs.3,00,000/- respectively. The reciprocal arrangement included withdrawal of various cases filed against the petitioners including the present one, namely, Ara Nawada P.S. case No.98 of 2012.
4. A supplementary affidavit has been filed today which discloses that the entire payment of Rs.11,00,000/- by way of three instalments as aforesaid has already been made to the daughter of the opposite party no.2, namely, Richa Rani @ Richa.
5. Despite sufficient opportunity having been granted to the opposite party no.2 by this Court, none has been appearing on his behalf on the past several dates and once again, none is present to represent him when the matter is called out today.
6. This Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served in continuing the prosecution against the petitioners in view of the compromise entered into between the parties and the petitioners having discharged their obligations thereunder by making payment as aforesaid.
7. In the interest of justice and in the facts and
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.661 of 2013 dt.21-05-2015 3/3 circumstances of the case, therefore, the first information report in connection with Ara Nawada P.S. case No.98 of 2012 registered for the offences under Sections 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioners is hereby quashed. The petition stands allowed. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/- U T