Patna High Court
Rohit Kumar Tripathi @ Rohit Tripathi vs The State Of Bihar on 13 August, 2024
Author: Sandeep Kumar
Bench: Sandeep Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78007 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-109 Year-2022 Thana- KHAGAUL District- Patna
======================================================
Rohit Kumar Tripathi @ Rohit Tripathi, son of Vimal Kumar Tripathi,
Resident of Quarter No. - B-5/15, I.G.I.M.S. Campus, Sheikhpura, P.S.-
Shastri Nagar, Dist. Patna.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Om Prakash Tiwary (Head Constable), S/O - Ashwini Kumar Tiwary,
resident of Rajapur Machli Gali,Chanakyapuri, Makan No. 27-B, P.S.-
Shastri Nagar, District- Patna Bihar. At present CBI Head quarters, Special
Duty and research Zone, CGO Complex,Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Vishwajeet Kumar Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Anjani Parashar, Advocate
Mr. Aakash Choudhary, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Nirmala Kumari, APP
For the Opp. Party No.2 : Mr. Maheshwar Dhar Dwivedi, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 13-08-2024
Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner,
learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite
party no.2.
2. Along with the written notes of arguments of
the petitioner, the certified copy of the complaint case no.274(c)
of 2021 as well as the certified copy of the order dated
23.06.2022
passed by the learned Magistrate in connection with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
Complaint Case No.274 (c) of 2021 have been filed, which are
taken on record.
3. This application has been filed for quashing
of F.I.R. vide Khagaul P.S Case No. 109 of 2022 registered for
the offence under sections 304-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code
and all consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid
F.I.R.
4. As per the F.I.R., the daughter of the
informant namely, Shalini Tiwari was married to Rahul Kumar
Tripathi on 24.06.2019. At the time of marriage the informant
had given household articles worth Rs.20,00,000/- to the
accused persons. After the marriage, the accused persons
including the petitioner started demanding a Swift Dzire car and
on account of non-fulfillment of said demand, the daughter of
the informant was tortured by the accused persons. It is also
alleged that the daughter of the informant was a teacher at Army
Public School, Danapur but, her entire salary was taken by the
her husband and his family members. Further, on 20.04.2022,
the accused persons verbally abused and assaulted informant's
daughter. The daughter of the informant informed this fact to her
mother and also said that her in-laws are planning to kill her and
they are not giving food to her. It is also alleged on the next day
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
at about 7:00 A.M. the son-in-law of the informant namely,
Rahul Tripathi informed that his wife (daughter of the
informant) has not taken food since morning and is not talking
with him and has closed the door of her room. On receiving the
information, the son of the informant went to the flat of his
sister and enquired about his sister, upon which, the accused
persons said that the doors of the room is closed. Thereafter, his
son went near the room and saw that the doors of the room were
open and his sister was hanging from the fan and her feet was
touching the floor. Thereafter, she was taken to Paras Hospital
where she was declared dead.
5. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner
submits that the allegations, as alleged in the FIR, are serious in
nature but whether the death was homicidal or suicidal is an
aspect of investigation. He further submits that from perusal of
the allegations, as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that
apart from a bald allegation that the entire family members were
demanding a Swift D-zire car and used to take her salary, no
specific allegation is alleged against anyone.
6. Learned Senior Counsel for petitioner further
submits that the petitioner has completed B.B.A L.L.B (Hons.)
- 5 years course from Christ University, Bengaluru in the year
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
2018. He then enrolled as an Advocate with the Bar Council of
Maharashtra and Goa and also cleared the Bar Council
Examination having enrollment No. MAH/1987/2018 and
started practicing in Mumbai, but later he shifted to Patna and
started practicing before this Court and Civil Court. In the year
2021, he completed L.L.M in Corporate and Commercial Laws
from Chanakya National Law University, Patna with 71.38%
marks, as would be evident from Annexure-P/4 series. The
petitioner also successfully cleared 31st Bihar Judicial Services
Mains Examination and got selected securing 35th Rank in the
merit list.
7. It has also been submitted by learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner appeared for the
Assistant Prosecution Officer (APO) examination and cleared
the preliminary examination. The petitioner has been preparing
for the competitive examination in Delhi to pursue a career in
Judicial Service and he has no concern with the matrimonial life
of his elder brother and the deceased. The petitioner had come
from Delhi to Patna only a few days before the date of
occurrence, which is evident from the case diary. Further,
nothing has been placed on record, even after several months of
investigation, to connect the petitioner with the crime.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
8. It has also been submitted by learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioner that the occurrence took place after
the petitioner had qualified in the Bihar Judicial Services Mains
Examination and was preparing for his interview, as such, he
was implicated in this case with general and omnibus
allegations only with a view to ruin his career. It has also been
submitted that the petitioner had also filed Cr. WJC No. 920 of
2022 praying for a direction upon the respondents to hold fair
and proper investigation and to collect, secure and examine
forensically the crucial electronic piece of evidence with regard
to the present case. Further, an I.A. was also filed in the
aforesaid criminal writ with a prayer that no coercive action be
taken against the petitioner as he had to attend the interview for
31st Bihar Judicial Services Competitive Examination and this
Court vide order dated 18.08.2022 restrained the authority from
executing the warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner as he
had to appear in the interview. Thereafter, petitioner was granted
the privilege of anticipatory bail by order dated 5.12.2022
passed in Cr. Misc No. 35687 of 2022.
9. It has been argued by learned Senior Counsel
for the petitioner that from perusal of the allegation, as alleged
in the F.I.R., it would manifest that no specific allegation is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
made against the petitioner. The petitioner hardly stayed with
his family, as would be evident from the facts recorded herein-
above and only because the petitioner had qualified in the mains
examination of the Bihar Judicial Services Examination and had
to appear in the interview, he has been implicated in this case in
order to ruin his career. It has also been argued that the
postmortem report and the viscera report confirm the fact that
the deceased has committed suicide by hanging. Further, the
deceased was not receiving any salary as she had left her job
due to the Covid-19 pandemic outbreak and was financially
supported by her husband.
10. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner
disputes the fact of a phone call to her mother-in-law, as alleged
in the F.I.R., as the telecom bill does not support this fact.
Further, the informant, who is employed in the C.B.I. has falsely
implicated the petitioner in this case in order to ruin his life and
career as no complaint or FIR against the petitioner regarding
demand of dowry, torture or misbehavior was made prior to the
alleged occurrence. There is no legal evidence connecting the
petitioner with the alleged offence. The FIR, case diary or the
charge-sheet does not disclose any demand of dowry or cruelty
by the petitioner, who is the brother-in-law of the deceased.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
11. It has also been submitted by learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioner that the CCTV footage, as described
by the Investigating Officer of the case in the Case Diary, shows
that the petitioner was only helping in getting the deceased to
the Hospital along with the brother of the deceased. Moreover,
the bank account statements clearly show that all the expenses
of the deceased including the education expenses were borne by
the husband of the deceased and therefore, there is no question
of demand of dowry from the deceased.
12. By making the aforesaid submissions,
learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
present F.I.R. has been instituted against the petitioner with an
ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the petitioner in
order to run his career and therefore, this Court may allow this
case and quash the F.I.R.
13. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner
has relied upon the following judgments :-
(i) Mahmood Ali and Others vs. State of
U.P and Ors. reported as 2023 SCC
OnLine SC 959.
(ii) Mirza Iqbal alias Golu and Anr. vs.
State of U.P and Anr. reported as 2021
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
SCC OnLine SC 1251.
(iii) Maneesha Yadav and Ors. vs. The
State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr.
reported as 2024 SCC online SC 643.
14. Learned counsel for the opposite party
no.2(informant) submits that during the investigation, the
Investigating Officer has found that the petitioner along with
other co-accused persons were involved in another criminal case
i.e. Complaint Case No. 274(c) of 2021 registered for the
offences under sections 147, 341, 323, 384, 389, 420, 427, 504,
506 and 34 IPC, which is pending before the Court of learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Danapur, which is evident
from paragraph no.150 of the case diary and therefore, the
contention of the petitioner that no complaint or FIR regarding
demand of dowry, torture or misbehavior was made prior to the
alleged occurrence is misconceived.
15. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2
also submits that during investigation several injuries were
found on the body of the deceased, which is mentioned in the
case diary and even the postmortem report also supports this
injury which clearly proves that the deceased was physically
tortured. He further submits that when the son of the informant,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
Shivam Kumar Tiwari reached the place of occurrence, he found
that all the accused persons were siting together in the main hall
of the flat and when he enquired about his sister, the accused
persons replied that the doors of the room are locked but he
found that the doors of the room were not locked and were open
and his sister was hanging from the ceiling fan. Thereafter, the
accused persons advised the son of the informant to dispose of
the body, but he did not agree and upon his insistence the body
of the deceased was brought to the Paras Hospital, Patna where
she was declared dead.
16. In order to establish the complicity of the
present petitioner, the learned counsel for the opposite party
no.2 submits that the petitioner along with his friends tried to
take away the dead-body of the deceased and even threatened
the son of the informant with dire consequences but after
learning that the police authorities were present, the petitioner
along with his friends fled away from the hospital, which could
be corroborated from the CCTV footage of the Paras Hospital.
Further, the mobile location of the petitioner shows that after the
marriage of the deceased, the petitioner used to live in Patna
with his father, mother, elder brother and sister-in-law (the
deceased) and during the police investigation several witnesses
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
have stated that all the accused persons were actually residing
together. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that he was
preparing for Judicial Services Examination in Delhi is
incorrect.
17. It has also been argued by learned counsel
for the opposite party no.2 that the Supervising Authority i.e.
the Additional Superintendent of Police, Danapur had accepted
that there was a sign of rope at the neck of the deceased but the
deceased was found hanging with a dupatta, and on the basis of
the injury found on the body of the deceased, the Supervising
Authority had formed an opinion that commission of assault on
the body of the deceased before her death could not be denied,
and therefore the offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal
Code was also added by the Additional Superintendent of
Police, however the charge sheet has been submitted only under
section 304-B/34 of Indian Penal Code.
18. The next submission of learned counsel for
the opposite party no.2 is that the dupatta by which the deceased
was found hanging from the ceiling fan has not been produced
by the accused before the police despite repeated requests by the
Investigating Officer, which is substantiated from the case diary.
Though the accused persons are trying to establish that it is a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
case of suicide but the postmortem report speaks that it is a
brutal murder, which could not have happened without the help
of the petitioner.
19. Lastly, it has been submitted by learned
counsel for the opposite party no.2 that if a person of bright
carrier commits murder, there is no express provision in law to
quash the criminal case pending against him and moreover, the
fact whether it is a case of murder or suicide can only be
decided during the trial.
20. I have considered the submissions of the
parties and perused the materials on record. From reading of the
F.I.R. and other materials available on record, it appears that the
petitioner is the brother-in-law (devar) of the deceased. The
marriage was solemnized in the year 2019. From the facts on
record, it appears that the deceased may have committed suicide
though it is a matter of trial. There is no allegation against the
petitioner except general and omnibus allegations. The deceased
was taken to Paras Hospital for treatment after she was found
hanging in her room. The petitioner being a junior member of
the family is not expected to demand dowry and torture the
deceased. Moreover, it has come during investigation that most
of the time the petitioner was not staying in the house but was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
preparing for Judicial Services Examination in Delhi.
21. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Mahmood Ali and Others vs. State of U.P. (supra) while
considering an application in which the quashment of the
criminal proceeding was sought on the ground of frivolous and
vexatious proceedings instituted with an ulterior motive for
wreaking vengeance, has held that the Court has a duty to
examine the F.I.R./complaint as the complainant/informant may
draft the F.I.R./complaint meticulously ensuring that it include
all necessary details and elements of the alleged offence. It is
not sufficient for the Court to solely rely on the averments of the
F.I.R./complaint to determine the essential ingredients of the
offence.
22. It will be relevant to quote paragraph no.13
of the aforesaid decision, which reads as under:-
"13. At this stage, we would like to observe
something important. Whenever an accused
comes before the Court invoking either the
inherent powers under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) or
extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226
of the Constitution to get the FIR or the
criminal proceedings quashed essentially on
the ground that such proceedings are
manifestly frivolous or vexatious or instituted
with the ulterior motive for wreaking
vengeance, then in such circumstances the
Court owes a duty to look into the FIR with
care and a little more closely. We say so
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
because once the complainant decides to
proceed against the accused with an ulterior
motive for wreaking personal vengeance, etc.,
then he would ensure that the FIR/complaint
is very well drafted with all the necessary
pleadings. The complainant would ensure that
the averments made in the FIR/complaint are
such that they disclose the necessary
ingredients to constitute the alleged offence.
Therefore, it will not be just enough for the
Court to look into the averments made in the
FIR/complaint alone for the purpose of
ascertaining whether the necessary
ingredients to constitute the alleged offence
are disclosed or not. In frivolous or vexatious
proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look
into many other attending circumstances
emerging from the record of the case over and
above the averments and, if need be, with due
care and circumspection try to read in
between the lines. The Court while exercising
its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC
or Article 226 of the Constitution need not
restrict itself only to the stage of a case but is
empowered to take into account the overall
circumstances leading to the initiation/
registration of the case as well as the
materials collected in the course of
investigation. Take for instance the case on
hand. Multiple FIRs have been registered
over a period of time. It is in the background
of such circumstances the registration of
multiple FIRs assumes importance, thereby
attracting the issue of wreaking vengeance
out of private or personal grudge as alleged."
23. In the case of Mirza Iqbal @ Golu and Anr.
vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. (supra) again while
considering the case of the brother-in-law and mother-in-law of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
the deceased for quashing of the criminal proceeding in
connection with a case of dowry death, the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in paragraph nos.11 and 12 has held as under:
"11. The appellants are brother-in-law and
mother-in- law respectively of the deceased. A
perusal of the complaint filed by the 2 nd
respondent, pursuant to which a crime was
registered, does not indicate any specific
allegations by disclosing the involvement of
the appellants. It is the specific case of the 1 st
appellant that he was working as a cashier in
ICICI Bank at Khalilabad branch, which is at
about 40 kms from Gorakhpur. The alleged
incident was on 24.07.2018 at about 8 p.m.
When the investigation was pending, the 1 st
appellant has filed affidavit before Senior
Superintendent of Police on 08.08.2018,
giving his employment details and stated that
he was falsely implicated. It was his specific
case that during the relevant time, he was
working at ICICI Bank, Khalilabad branch,
Gorakhpur and his mother was also staying
with him. The Branch Manager has endorsed
his presence in the branch, showing in-time at
09:49 a.m. and out-time at 06:25 p.m. Even in
the statement of 2nd respondent recorded by
the police and also in the final report filed
under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C., except
omnibus and vague allegations, there is no
specific allegation against the appellants to
show their involvement for the offences
alleged. This Court, time and again, has
noticed making the family members of
husband as accused by making casual
reference to them in matrimonial disputes.
Learned senior counsel for the appellants, in
support of her case, placed reliance on the
judgment of this Court in the case of Geeta
Mehrotra v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2012) 10
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
SCC 741. In the aforesaid case, this Court in
identical circumstances, has quashed the
proceedings by observing that family members
of husband were shown as accused by making
casual reference to them. In the very same
judgment, it is held that a large number of
family members are shown in the FIR by
casually mentioning their names and the
contents do not disclose their active
involvement, as such, taking cognizance of the
matter against them was not justified. It is
further held that taking cognizance in such
type of cases results in abuse of judicial
process. Paras 18 and 25 of the said
judgment, which are relevant for the purpose
of this case, read as under:
"18. Their Lordships of the Supreme
Court in Ramesh case [(2005)3 SCC
507 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 735] had been
pleased to hold that the bald
allegations made against the sister-
in-law by the complainant appeared to
suggest the anxiety of the informant to
rope in as many of the husband's
relatives as possible. It was held that
neither the FIR nor the charge-sheet
furnished the legal basis for the
Magistrate to take cognizance of the
offences alleged against the
appellants. The learned Judges were
pleased to hold that looking to the
allegations in the FIR and the contents
of the charge-sheet, none of the
alleged offences under Sections 498-A,
406 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act were made against the
married sister of the complainant's
husband who was undisputedly not
living with the family of the
complainant's husband. Their
Lordships of the Supreme Court were
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
pleased to hold that the High Court
ought not to have relegated the sister-
in-law to the ordeal of trial.
Accordingly, the proceedings against
the appellants were quashed and the
appeal was allowed.
25. However, we deem it appropriate
to add by way of caution that we may
not be misunderstood so as to infer
that even if there are allegations of
overt act indicating the complicity of
the members of the family named in
the FIR in a given case, cognizance
would be unjustified but what we wish
to emphasise by highlighting is that, if
the FIR as it stands does not disclose
specific allegation against the accused
more so against the co-accused
specially in a matter arising out of
matrimonial bickering, it would be
clear abuse of the legal and judicial
process to mechanically send the
named accused in the FIR to undergo
the trial unless of course the FIR
discloses specific allegations which
would persuade the court to take
cognizance of the offence alleged
against the relatives of the main
accused who are prima facie not found
to have indulged in physical and
mental torture of the complainant
wife. It is the well-settled principle
laid down in cases too numerous to
mention, that if the FIR did not
disclose the commission of an offence,
the court would be justified in
quashing the proceedings preventing
the abuse of process of law.
Simultaneously, the courts are
expected to adopt a cautious approach
in matters of quashing, especially in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
cases of matrimonial disputes whether
the FIR in fact discloses commission
of an offence by the relatives of the
principal accused or the FIR prima
facie discloses a case of over-
implication by involving the entire
family of the accused at the instance of
the complainant, who is out to settle
her scores arising out of the teething
problem or skirmish of domestic
bickering while settling down in her
new matrimonial surrounding."
12. From a perusal of the complaint filed by the
2nd respondent and the final report filed by the
police under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C., we are
of the view that the aforesaid judgment fully
supports the case of the appellants. Even in
the counter affidavits filed on behalf of
respondent nos.1 and 2, it is not disputed that
the 1st appellant was working in ICICI Bank
at Khalilabad branch, but merely stated that
there was a possibility to reach Gorakhpur by
8 p.m. Though there is an allegation of
causing injuries, there are no other external
injuries noticed in the postmortem certificate,
except the single ante-mortem injury i.e.
ligature mark around the neck, and the cause
of death is shown as asphyxia. Having regard
to the case of the appellants and the material
placed on record, we are of the considered
view that except vague and bald allegations
against the appellants, there are no specific
allegations disclosing the involvement of the
appellants to prosecute them for the offences
alleged. In view of the judgment of this Court
in the case of Geeta Mehrotra and Anr., which
squarely applies to the case of the appellants,
we are of the view that it is a fit case to quash
the proceedings."
24. In Maneesha Yadav & Ors. vs. The State of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
Uttar Pradesh and Anr. (supra) the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
paragraph no.14 has held as follows:-
"14. We may gainfully refer to the observations of
this Court in the case of Anand Kumar
Mohatta and Another v. State (NCT of Delhi),
Department of Home (2019) 11 SCC 706:
"14. First, we would like to deal with the
submission of the learned Senior
Counsel for Respondent 2 that once the
charge-sheet is filed, petition for
quashing of FIR is untenable. We do
not see any merit in this submission,
keeping in mind the position of this
Court in Joseph Salvaraj A. v. State of
Gujarat [Joseph Salvaraj A. v. State of
Gujarat, (2011) 7 SCC 59 : (2011) 3
SCC (Cri) 23]. In Joseph Salvaraj A.
[Joseph Salvaraj A. v. State of Gujarat,
(2011) 7 SCC 59 : (2011) 3 SCC (Cri)
23], this Court while deciding the
question whether the High Court could
entertain the Section 482 petition for
quashing of FIR, when the charge-sheet
was filed by the police during the
pendency of the Section 482 petition,
observed : (SCC p. 63, para 16)
"16. Thus, from the general conspectus
of the various sections under which the
appellant is being charged and is to be
prosecuted would show that the same
are not made out even prima facie from
the complainant's FIR. Even if the
charge-sheet had been filed, the
learned Single Judge [Joesph Saivaraj
A. v. State of Gujarat, 2007 SCC
OnLine Guj 365] could have still
examined whether the offences alleged
to have been committed by the
appellant were prima facie made out
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
from the complainant's FIR, charge-
sheet, documents, etc. or not."
15. Even otherwise it must be
remembered that the provision invoked
by the accused before the High Court is
Section 482 CrPC and that this Court is
hearing an appeal from an order under
Section 482 CrPC. Section 482 CrPC
reads as follows:
"482. Saving of inherent powers of the
High Court.- Nothing in this Code
shall be deemed to limit or affect the
inherent powers of the High Court to
make such orders as may be necessary
to give effect to any order under this
Code, or to prevent abuse of the
process of any court or otherwise to
secure the ends of justice."
16. There is nothing in the words of this
section which restricts the exercise of
the power of the Court to prevent the
abuse of process of court or
miscarriage of justice only to the stage
of the FIR. It is settled principle of law
that the High Court can exercise
jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC
even when the discharge application is
pending with the trial court [G. Sagar
Suri v. State of U.P., (2000) 2 SCC 636,
para 7 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 513. Umesh
Kumar v. State of A.P., (2013) 10 SCC
591, para 20 : (2014) 1 SCC (Cri)
338 : (2014) 2 SCC (L&S) 237].
Indeed, it would be a travesty to hold
that proceedings initiated against a
person can be interfered with at the
stage of FIR but not if it has advanced
and the allegations have materialised
into a chargesheet. On the contrary it
could be said that the abuse of process
caused by FIR stands aggravated if the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
FIR has taken the form of a charge-
sheet after investigation. The power is
undoubtedly conferred to prevent abuse
of process of power of any court."
25. Considering the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Mahmood Ali and
Others vs. State of U.P. ; Mirza Iqbal @ Golu and Anr. vs.
State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. and Maneesha Yadav & Ors.
vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. (supra), I am of the
view that this is a fit case in which the quashing application of
the petitioner should be entertained under section 482 of the
Cr.P.C. as from the reading of the F.I.R. and other materials on
record, it appears that there is general and omnibus allegation
against the petitioner, who is brother-in-law (devar) of the
deceased. Though in the F.I.R. and other materials, the
informant has tried to bring out the ingredients of the offences
but considering the fact that the petitioner was preparing for his
Judicial Services Examination in Delhi and subsequently,
qualified in the same, I am of the view that after the death of the
deceased, the family members of the deceased have filed a case
against all the family members of the husband of the deceased
including the petitioner with a view to ruin the career of the
petitioner though there is no material to directly connect the
petitioner with the alleged crime. He has been made accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
merely because he is the brother-in-law of the deceased. This
tendency of making all the family members of the husband of
the deceased as accused has been deprecated by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in a number of judgments.
26. Furthermore, the F.I.R. does not disclose any
specific allegation against the petitioner and the same arises out
of a matrimonial dispute. The petitioner cannot be asked to
undergo trial because the F.I.R. does not disclose specific
allegations to persuade this Court to take a view that the
petitioner should undergo trial. The petitioner is a junior
member of the family i.e. brother-in-law of the deceased and
prima facie it appears that he has not indulged in physical and
mental torture of the deceased. Simply because the petitioner is
brother-in-law of the deceased and there is general and omnibus
allegation against him, he should not undergo the rigors of trial.
The F.I.R. and the other materials do not bring out any specific
allegation against the petitioner of having tortured the deceased,
who was his bhabhi and it also appears that he has been falsely
implicated at the instance of the informant, who is none other
but the father of the deceased.
27. So far as the contention of learned counsel
for the opposite party no.2 that the petitioner along with other
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
co-accused persons were involved in another criminal case i.e.
Complaint Case No. 274(c) of 2021 prior to lodging of the
present F.I.R. is concerned, it appears from the certified copy of
the complaint petition of Complaint case no.274(c) of 2021 that
in the aforesaid complaint case the petitioner was not made an
accused rather Vimal Kumar Tripathi, Rahul Kumar Tripathi,
Vivek Kumar Tripathi, Khusboo Devi and Prashant Kumar
Mishra were made accused. Even otherwise, in the aforesaid
complaint case the cognizance has been taken only against
Vimal Kumar Tripathi, who is the father of the petitioner, under
sections 341, 323, 427 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code, which
is evident from the certified copy of the order dated 23.06.2022
passed by the learned Magistrate in connection with Complaint
Case No.274(c) of 2021.
28. In the opinion of this Court, the submission
of learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 is misconceived
and has been made only with a view to mislead this Court. This
kind of false submission is fit to be rejected and deprecated.
29. In view of the aforesaid discussions, this
application is allowed. Accordingly, the F.I.R. vide Khagaul P.S
Case No. 109 of 2022 registered for the offence under sections
304-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and all consequential
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78007 of 2023 dt.13-08-2024
proceedings arising out of the aforesaid F.I.R. are hereby
quashed with respect to present petitioner only.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
pawan/-
AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE N/A.
Uploading Date 14.08.2024
Transmission Date 14.08.2024
