Patna High Court
Md. Irshad vs The State Of Bihar on 9 August, 2024
Author: Partha Sarthy
Bench: Partha Sarthy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35745 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-123 Year-2021 Thana- SULTANGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
1. MD. IRSHAD Son of Late Md. Rafiullah Resident of Kasmandikala, PS-
Malihabad, District- Lucknow
2. Rehana @ Rehana Khatoon Wife of Md. Irsad Resident of Kasmandikala,
PS- Malihabad, District- Lucknow
3. Md. Akbar Son of Md. Idris Resident of Mohalla- Noon Ka Chauraha, PS-
Khajekalan, District- Patna
4. Shama Praveen Wife of Md. Akbar Resident of Mohalla- Noon Ka
Chauraha, PS- Khajekalan, District- Patna
5. Rafi Ahmad @ Md. Rafi Ahmad @ Raju son of Sabi Ahmad Resident of
Village- Lodi Katra, Atta Chakki, PS- Khajekalan, District- Patna
6. Asama Khatoon Wife of Rafi Ahmad @ Md. Rafi Ahmad @ Raju Resident
of Village- Lodi Katra, Atta Chakki, PS- Khajekalan, District- Patna
7. Shamima Khatoon Wife of Md. Idrish Resident of Mohalla- Noon ka
Chauraha, PS- Khajekalan, District- Patna
8. Reshama Khatoon Wife of Md. Moin Resident of Mohalla- Gulsan Haidari,
PS- Khajekalan, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Tabassum Praveen Wife of Md. Asraf Resident of Mohalla- Noon ka
Chauraha, Gulshan Haidari, PS- Khajekalan, District- Patna, present address
Daughter of Md. Javed, resident of Mohalla- Dargah Road Chauraha, PS-
Sultanganj, PO- Mahendru, District- Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP
Md. Shahid Akhtar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
CAV JUDGMENT
Date : 09-08-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party
no.2.
2. The petitioners have filed the instant application
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35745 of 2023 dt.09-08-2024
praying for quashing the order dated 21.1.2023 passed in
Sultanganj P.S Case no. 123 of 2021 whereby the learned Sub-
Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna City was pleased to take
cognizance for the offence under sections 498A, 341, 323, 34
and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The prosecution case, as per the written statement
of the informant-opposite party no.2 dated 22.5.2021 addressed
to the Officer-Incharge of the Sultanganj Police Station is that
she was married to Md. Asraf on 30.11.2019. After going to her
sasural, she was treated well for 25 days but thereafter her
husband started making demand of Rs. 3 lacs by way of dowry
and her mother-in-law started to abuse and assault her. The
informant further states that her nanad (husband's sister),
Asama Khatoon and Reshama Khatoon used to taunt her that
nothing was given in dowry. She was described as a beggar and
on protest by the informant, she was beaten up. The informant
states that her bhaisur (husband's elder brother) got hold of her
hair and threw her to the ground saying that she should be burnt
alive. Her gotni (husband's brother's wife) Shama Praveen
assaulted her with kicks and fists. All the accused threatened
that she would be permitted to stay in the house only when she
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35745 of 2023 dt.09-08-2024
got Rs. 3 lacs from her parents which according to the
informant's mother-in-law was required for her son to start
business. The informant states that she returned to her father's
place on 28.2.2020. She was pregnant and has been residing at
her father's place. The informant states that the accused persons
keep abusing her on the telephone and as such the instant case.
4. On the basis of the written statement of the
informant, Sultanganj P.S. Case no. 123 of 2021 was registered
on 22.5.2021 for the offence under sections 498A, 341, 323, 34
and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act.
5. After investigation of the case, charge-sheet having
been submitted, cognizance was taken by the learned trial Court
by order dated 21.1.2023 which has been challenged by the
petitioners in the instant application.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
the petitioners are innocent and have not committed any
offence. They have been falsely implicated in the case because
of enmity, grudge and dirty village and family politics. No such
occurrence as alleged in the FIR has taken place and for the
same cause of action, the informant also lodged a Complaint
Case no. 529 of 2020 for the offence registered under sections
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35745 of 2023 dt.09-08-2024
498A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of
the Dowry Prohibition Act. A copy of the same has been brought
on record as Annexure-2 to the petition. The informant having
filed two cases for the same alleged offence, the instant case is
an abuse of the process of the Court. The petitioners are the
relatives of the husband of the informant and never made any
demand of dowry etc nor ever tortured the informant, as
incorrectly alleged in the FIR. It is thus prayed that the instant
application be allowed and the order taking cognizance be
quashed.
7. The application is opposed by learned APP for the
State and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. Learned
counsel for the opposite party no.2 referring to the counter
affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2 submits that
the witnesses have supported the allegations against the
petitioners which led to filing of the charge-sheet and
cognizance has been rightly taken against them. There is no
merit in the instant application and the same be dismissed.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
having perused the material on record including the contents of
the police case diary, it transpires that the petitioners are named
in the FIR and there is direct allegation against them of having
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35745 of 2023 dt.09-08-2024
abused, assaulted as also physically and mentally tortured the
informant. The witnesses whose statements have been recorded
in paragraph nos. 6, 7 and 8 of the case diary and who happen to
be the father, mother and brother of the informant as also an
independent witness whose statement has been recorded in
paragraph no. 50 of the case diary have all supported the
prosecution case against the petitioners herein. The Court finds
that there is sufficient material against the petitioners to proceed
against them and the learned trial Court rightly took cognizance
in the case under sections 498A, 341, 323, 504 and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act.
9. So far as contention of learned counsel for the
petitioner that for the same offence, besides the instant FIR
(Annexure-1) the informant also filed a complaint case on
earlier occasion is concerned, on perusal of the petition of
complaint (Annexure-2) it transpires that while the complaint
was filed on 30.9.2020 for an occurrence which took place
between 30.11.2019 and 26.2.2020, the FIR from which the
instant application arises was registered on 22.5.2021 for an
occurrence said to have taken place on 3.4.2021. Thus the Court
finds no merit in the contention raised by learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35745 of 2023 dt.09-08-2024
petitioner.
10. The Court finds no merit in the instant application
and no illegality in the order impugned.
11. The application is dismissed.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Shiv/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 27.06.2024
Uploading Date 09.08.2024
Transmission Date 09.08.2024
