Patna High Court
Ravi Shankar vs The State Of Bihar on 21 April, 2025
Author: Chandra Shekhar Jha
Bench: Chandra Shekhar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22113 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Patna
======================================================
1. Ravi Shankar Son of Dhananjay Kumar Sinha Resident of Village - Kakhra,
P.S. - Noor Sarai, District - Nalanda
2. Dhananjay Kumar Sinha @ Dhananjay Son of Late Bhushan Prasad
Resident of Village - Kakhra, P.S. - Noor Sarai, District - Nalanda
3. Asha Sinha Wife of Dhananjay Kumar Sinha Resident of Village - Kakhra,
P.S. - Noor Sarai, District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Archana Kumari Daughter of Om Prakash Resident of Mohalla - Purani
Jakkanpur (Janta Road), P.O. - G.P.O., P.S. - Gardanibagh, District - Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Ravish, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 21-04-2025
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The present application has been filed by the
petitioners for quashing of the First Information Report (in
short 'F.I.R.') of Mahila P.S. Case No.47 of 2021 dated
04.05.2021
registered under Sections 341, 323, 498-A,
506 , 509 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'I.P.C.')
as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22113 of 2025 dt.21-04-2025
3. The allegation against the petitioners is to
assault the informant along with other relative/family
members due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry and thus
by committed cruelty upon O.P. No.2 on various occasions.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
petitioners that the petitioner no.1 is husband, petitioner no.2
and 3 are father and mother of the husband of O.P. No. 2. It
is pointed out that petitioner no.2 and 3 are living separately
having no connection with their daily and domestic affairs. It
is submitted that the implication of petitioner no. 2 and 3
appears prima facie only out of the relation, being in-laws of
O.P. No.2. It is also submitted that the allegation qua alleged
cruelty appears very much general and omnibus against them
and moreover the matter appears compromised between the
parties against the permanent alimony of Rs.50,00,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Lakhs only) and they also decided to dissolve
their marriage by way of mutual divorce. In support of his
submission, the learned counsel referred to Matrimonial Case
No. 1447 of 2023 passed by learned Additional Principal
Judge, Family Court, Patna annexed as Annexure-P/2.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22113 of 2025 dt.21-04-2025
5. In view of aforesaid, it is submitted that as
parties settled their dispute, continuing with present criminal
proceeding before the Trial Court would only amount to abuse
of the process of court of law. In support of his submission,
learned counsel relied upon legal report of Hon'ble Supreme
Court as available through Abhishek vs. State of Madhya
Pradesh reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 1083.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite
party no.2 has also affirmed the factum of compromise as
submitted above by learned counsel appearing for petitioners.
7. It would be apposite to reproduce paragraph nos.
13, 14, 15, 16 & 17 of the Abhishek's case (supra),
which reads as under:
"13. Instances of a husband's family members filing
a petition to quash criminal proceedings launched
against them by his wife in the midst of matrimonial
disputes are neither a rarity nor of recent origin.
Precedents aplenty abound on this score. We may
now take note of some decisions of particular
relevance. Recently, in Kahkashan Kausar alias
Sonam v. State of Bihar [(2022) 6 SCC 599], this
Court had occasion to deal with a similar situation
where the High Court had refused to quash a FIR
registered for various offences, including Section
498A IPC. Noting that the foremost issue that
required determination was whether allegations made
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22113 of 2025 dt.21-04-2025
against the in-laws were general omnibus allegations
which would be liable to be quashed, this Court
referred to earlier decisions wherein concern was
expressed over the misuse of Section 498A IPC and
the increased tendency to implicate relatives of the
husband in matrimonial disputes. This Court observed
that false implications by way of general omnibus
allegations made in the course of matrimonial
disputes, if left unchecked, would result in misuse of
the process of law. On the facts of that case, it was
found that no specific allegations were made against
the in-laws by the wife and it was held that allowing
their prosecution in the absence of clear allegations
against the in-laws would result in an abuse of the
process of law. It was also noted that a criminal trial,
leading to an eventual acquittal, would inflict severe
scars upon the accused and such an exercise ought to
be discouraged.
14. In Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand [(2010) 7
SCC 667], this Court noted that the tendency to
implicate the husband and all his immediate relations
is also not uncommon in complaints filed under
Section 498A IPC. It was observed that the Courts
have to be extremely careful and cautious in dealing
with these complaints and must take pragmatic
realities into consideration while dealing with
matrimonial cases, as allegations of harassment by
husband's close relations, who were living in different
cities and never visited or rarely visited the place
where the complainant resided, would add an entirely
different complexion and such allegations would have
to be scrutinised with great care and circumspection.
15. Earlier, in Neelu Chopra v. Bharti [(2009) 10
SCC 184], this Court observed that the mere mention
of statutory provisions and the language thereof, for
lodging a complaint, is not the 'be all and end all' of
the matter, as what is required to be brought to the
notice of the Court is the particulars of the offence
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22113 of 2025 dt.21-04-2025
committed by each and every accused and the role
played by each and every accused in the commission
of that offence. These observations were made in the
context of a matrimonial dispute involving Section
498A IPC.
16. Of more recent origin is the decision of this Court
in Mahmood Ali v. State of U.P. (Criminal Appeal No.
2341 of 2023, decided on 08.08.2023) on the legal
principles applicable apropos Section 482 Cr. P.C.
Therein, it was observed that when an accused comes
before the High Court, invoking either the inherent
power under Section 482 Cr. P.C. or the
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 of
wreaking vengeance, then in such circumstances, the
High Court owes a duty to look into the FIR with care
and a little more closely. It was further observed that
it will not be 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 as, 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, to try
and read between the lines.
17. In State of Haryana and Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal
and Ors [(1992) Supp (1) SCC 335], this Court
had set out, by way of illustration, the broad
categories of cases in which the inherent power under
Section 482 Cr. P.C. could be exercised. Para 102 of
the decision reads as follows:
"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the
various relevant provisions of the Code under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22113 of 2025 dt.21-04-2025
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 information
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 any offence and make out a
case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22113 of 2025 dt.21-04-2025
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
person 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 Act concerned (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 Act
concerned, 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. In view of aforesaid factual and legal submissions
and by taking note of fact as petitioner no. 2 and 3 are in-laws
living separately and petitioner no. 1 is the husband with
whom, the dispute of O.P. No.2, appears compromised,
therefore, in view of Abhishek Case (supra), continuing
with present criminal proceedings before the trial court would
only amount to abuse of the process of court of law.
9. Accordingly, the F.I.R. of Mahila P.S. Case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22113 of 2025 dt.21-04-2025
No.47 of 2021 dated 04.05.2021 with all its consequential
proceedings emanating therefrom qua all above named
petitioners before the learned Trial Court is hereby quashed
and set aside.
10. The application stands allowed.
11. Let a copy of the judgment be communicated to
the learned trial court forthwith.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
S.Tripathi/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 22.04.2025
Transmission Date 22.04.2025
