Vijay Shankar Pathak And Anr vs State Of Bihar And Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 5027 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20139 of 2017
     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1707 Year-2016 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
                                              Patna
     ======================================================

1. Vijay Shankar Pathak, son of Late Pandit Paras Nath Pathak.

2. Sandeep Pathak, son of Sri Vijay Shankar Pathak, both resident of A/64, Police Colony, Anisabad, P.S.- Gardanibagh, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Preeti Upadhyay @ Prity Chaturvedi wife of Dusyant Upadhyay, D/o Shambhu Nath Chaubey, at present resident of Ram Nath Apartment, Flat No. 402B, IAS Colony, Kidwaipuri, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Patna.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sourendra Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.

For the O.P. No.2 : None.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 03-10-2023

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The case was taken up on 26.09.2023, on the

said date no one appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party

No.2. Thereafter, the case was taken up on 27.09.2023,

again no one appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party

No.2. Today, when the matter is taken up, again no one

appears on behalf of the Opposite Party No.2.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20139 of 2017 dt.03-10-2023

that the matrimonial dispute in between the husband and the

wife has been compromised, thereafter, divorce by mutual

consent has been obtained as would be evident from

'Annexure-2' to the supplementary affidavit, it is next

submitted that the petitioners are maternal father-in-law and

maternal uncle and have falsely been implicated in the case

with general and omnibus allegation. It is next submitted

that since the matter has been compromised and divorce has

been obtained by mutual consent in between the Opposite

Party No.2 and her husband, as such, it appears that the

Opposite Party No.2 has lost interest in the case, thus, the

learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 is not

appearing. The learned counsel next submits that even from

perusal of the allegation as alleged in the complaint petition

instituted by the Opposite Party No.2, it would manifest that

the allegations against the petitioners are general and

omnibus in nature i.e. no specific allegation is alleged, it is

also submitted that petitioner no.1 being the maternal

grand-father of the husband of the Opposite Party No.2 and

petitioner no.2 being maternal uncle of the husband of the

Opposite Party No.2, are not even staying with the family of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20139 of 2017 dt.03-10-2023

the husband of the O.P. No.2. It is next submitted that

whenever any dispute, more particularly, matrimonial

dispute arises, the entire family members are implicated in a

mechanical manner.

4. As submitted by the learned counsel for the

petitioners that the case in between the Opposite Party No.2

and her husband has been compromised and divorce has

been obtained by way of mutual consent as is evident from

the order dated 06.09.2021 in Matrimonial Case No. 292 of

2018 (annexed with 'Supplementary Affidavit') passed by

the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna, as such,

the continuation of the present proceedings against the

petitioners is nothing but an abuse of the process of the

Court.

5. The learned A.P.P. for the State is also not in a

position to rebut the submissions of the learned counsel for

the petitioners.

6. Considering the submissions made by the

learned counsel for the petitioners, the order dated

23.01.2017 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial

Magistrate, Patna in Complaint Case No. 1707(C) of 2016, Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20139 of 2017 dt.03-10-2023

whereby cognizance of offences has been taken under

Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 4

of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioners, is

hereby quashed.

7. The supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of

the petitioners is taken on record.

8. The quashing application is thus allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Nilmani/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                N.A.
Uploading Date          04.10.2023
Transmission Date       N.A.