Patna High Court
Manish Kumar Mishra vs The State Of Bihar on 10 April, 2025
Author: Chandra Shekhar Jha
Bench: Chandra Shekhar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17103 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-397 Year-2023 Thana- BHABHU(KAIMUR) COMPLAIN C
District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Manish Kumar Mishra, Son Of Bhagawati Sharan Mishra Resident of H. No.
382, Kalindi Basti, Bhuiyadih, P.S. - Sitaram Dera, Jamshedur, Jharkhand.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Upendra Pandey Son Of Mukhram Pandey R/o Village - Sonvarsa, P.S.-
Belav, Dist- Kaimur (BHABUA).
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 36119 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-397 Year-2023 Thana- BHABHU(KAIMUR) COMPLAIN C
District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
1. Yogendra Kumar Pandey son of Late Sitaram Pandey R/o 26/E, Baridih
Basti, Shakti Nagar, Near- Bharat Gas Godown, P.S.- sidgora (Jamshedpur),
Dist.- East Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
2. Bhagmati Devi W/o Yogendra Kumar Pandey R/o 26/E, Baridih Basti,
Shakti Nagar, Near- Bharat Gas Godown, P.S.- sidgora (Jamshedpur), Dist.-
East Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
3. Priyanka Kumari @ Kumari Priyanka D/o Yogendra Kumar Pandey R/o
26/E, Baridih Basti, Shakti Nagar, Near- Bharat Gas Godown, P.S.- sidgora
(Jamshedpur), Dist.- East Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
4. Jitendra Tiwari @ Jitendra Kumar Tiwari Son of Parasnath Tiwari R/o 26/E,
Baridih Basti, Shakti Nagar, Near- Bharat Gas Godown, P.S.- sidgora
(Jamshedpur), Dist.- East Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Upendra Pandey Son of Mukhram Pandey R/o village- Sonbarsha, P.O.-
Miw, P.S.- Belaon, District- kaimur (Bhabhua), At present- R/o Ward No. 11
(Bhabhua) Chakbandi Road, Near Gayatri Mandir, P.S.- Bhabhua, District-
Kaimur (Bhabhua).
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 17103 of 2024)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Brisketu Sharan Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Amitesh Kumar, APP
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17103 of 2024 dt.10-04-2025
2/8
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 36119 of 2024)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bachan Ojha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha.1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 10-04-2025
Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
parties.
2. Both aforesaid applications have been filed for
quashing the cognizance order dated 30.10.2023 passed by the
Ld. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, Kaimur at Bhabhua
(herein referred as "ACJM") whereby and whereunder cognizance
was taken against petitioners for the offence under sections 341,
323 & 386 of IPC in connection with Complaint Case No. 397 of
2023 (which is a protest petition converted into complaint petition
arising out of filing of final form bearing Final Report No. 81/22
dated 19.12.2022 by the prosecution finding the averments made
in the FIR in relation to Bhagwanpur (Belav) P.S. Case No.
192/2022 dated 06.09.2022 to be incorrect/false one.)
3. Prosecution case in brief is that the brother of the
opposite party No. 2 and daughter of the accused No. 1, namely
Yogendra Pandey (in Cr. Misc. No. 36119 of 2024) are husband
and wife and, therefore, the opposite party No. 2 and the accused
No. 1 are relative. There is some matrimonial dispute amongst the
Priyanka Kumari @ Kumari Priyanka and the brother of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17103 of 2024 dt.10-04-2025
3/8
complainant i.e. O.P. No. 2 namely Ravindra, which resulted into
institution a complaint case before the Family Court, Jamshedpur,
which was subsequently sent for investigation under 156(3). O.P.
No. 2 as also the accused No.1 entered into settlement and agreed
for dissolving the marriage against one time alimony. Opposite
party No.2 alleges that it was informed to the accused Nos. 1 and
2 that since the case related to the younger brother of the opposite
party No. 2 therefore it would be appropriate to clear the terms of
settlement in his presence. Opposite party No. 2 invited the
accused persons for a talk at his native place in Bhabhua. On
05.06.2022
the accused persons including the petitioners are
alleged to have come to the native place of opposite party No.2 at
Village-Sonbarsa in Bhabhua District. Opposite party No. 2 who
was at Bhabhua got to know about the arrival of accused persons
including the petitioners and upon receiving such information he
too went to his native village Sonbarsa. The accused persons were
adamant on dissolving the marriage and were asking for the
money spent in the marriage by the accused persons. On the said
date i.e. 05.06.2022 co-incidentally, opposite party No.2 received
funds worth Rs.5,30,000/- from the PACS Chairman against the
food grains sold by his family. Opposite party No.2 was required to
take aforesaid money to Bhabhua. The accused persons while
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17103 of 2024 dt.10-04-2025
returning asked the O.P. No. 2 not to carry so much cash on motor
bike and requested for dropping him to Bhabhua which would
come in route. In midway the accused persons have robbed of the
aforesaid amount from the O.P. No. 2 at the threat of his life. The
allegation against the petitioners is that they were carrying a pistol
which was put into the mouth of the O.P. No.2 and threatened him
to part with the said amount of Rs.5,30,000/-. Upon receiving
such threat of death the O.P. No. 2 gave the aforesaid amount to
the accused persons. Then accused No. 2 was thrown out of the
vehicle and before that the petitioner i.e. accused No. 5 took out
the golden chain from the neck of the O.P. No.2. Thereafter, on
aforesaid allegations a complaint case no. 688/2023 dated
07.06.2022 was lodged against all the accused persons, which is
converted in to F.I.R. by the order of the Ld. Court and later an
F.I.R. bearing Bhagwanpur (Belav) P.S. Case No. 192 of 2022
dated 06.09.2022 registered against all accused persons for the
offence under sections 420/120B/379/384/387/323/504 &
506/34 of IPC.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
petitioners that petitioner no. 3, namely, Prinyanka Kumari @
Kumari Priyanka, the wife of Rabindra Kumar Pandey, who is the
cousin of the informant/complainant Upendra Pandey, who is also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17103 of 2024 dt.10-04-2025
an accused of complaint case no. 1016 of 2022 as lodged by
petitioner no. 3. It is submitted that petitioner no. 1, is the father
and petitioner no. 2 is the mother of petitioner no. 3. In this
context, it is further submitted that to create pressure as to
compromise aforesaid matrimonial case in retaliation one FIR was
lodged initially, which was registered as Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No.
192/22, where police after investigation exonerated petitioners as
same was found false, whereafter, on protest, learned trial court
took cognizance against petitioners for offences punishable under
Sections 341, 323 and 386 of the Indian Penal Code.
5. It is further submitted by learned counsel that the
present prosecution is a classical example of malicious prosecution
that how to settle the personal vengeance, the petitioners were
implicated with false case as to settle the matrimonial disputes by
creating extra legal pressure. It is submitted that this case is
covered under the golden diagonals of State of Haryana and
Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal and Ors., reported in 1992 Supp (1)
Supreme Court Cases 335.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite
party no. 2 submitted that upon protest, learned Judicial
Magistrate took cognizance against petitioners but he could not
disputed the facts and litigating background and also the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17103 of 2024 dt.10-04-2025
submission of final where police found the case as untrue, as
raised by the learned counsel appearing for petitioners.
7. It would be apposite to re-produce para 102 of the
State of Haryana and Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal and Ors., reported
in 1992 Supp (1) Supreme Court Cases 335, which reads as
under:
"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation
of the various relevant provisions of the Code under
Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by
this Court in a series of decisions relating to the
exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226
or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code
which we have extracted and reproduced above, we
give the following categories of cases by way of
illustration wherein such power could be exercised
either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or
otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may
not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined
and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or
rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad
kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first
information report or the complaint, even if they are
taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety
do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a
case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first
informant report and other materials, if any,
accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable
offence, justifying an investigation by police officers
under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an
order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section
155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations
made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence
collected in support of the same do not disclose the
commission of nay offence and make out a case
against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17103 of 2024 dt.10-04-2025
not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only
a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted
by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as
contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR
or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable
on the basis of which no prudent persons can ever
reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground
for proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar
engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the
concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is
instituted) to the institution and continuance of the
proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision
in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious
redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is
manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the
proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior
motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and
with a view to spite him due to private and personal
grudge."
8. From the perusal of record and also taking note of the
arguments as canvassed by learned counsel appearing for the
parties, it appears that the parties are in litigating terms, where
before lodging the FIR, the informant was made accused by
petitioner no. 3 in matrimonial complaint case as discussed
aforesaid, whereafter, the informant lodged a police case against
petitioners i.e. Bhagwanpur (Belav) P.S. Case No. 192 of 2022,
where after investigation, police submitted final form exonerating
petitioners through charge-sheet no. 81/22 dated 19.12.2022,
whereafter considering the protest petition, the cognizance as
aforesiad was taken against petitioners.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17103 of 2024 dt.10-04-2025
9. In the background of aforesaid, it can be safely
arrived on the conclusion prima facie that the present criminal case
was registered out of oblique and ulterior motive against petitioner
and, therefore, same is covered under the guideline no. 7 of
Bhajan Lal' case (supra), accordingly, impugned order of
cognizance dated 30.10.2023 passed by the Ld. Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate-V, Kaimur at Bhabhua is hereby set aside and
quashed qua petitioners with all its consequential proceedings to
secure ends of justice.
10. Let copy of this judgment be sent to the trial court,
without delay.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 11.04.2025
Transmission Date 11.04.2025
