[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Krishna Murari Jha @ Krishna Murari vs The State Of Bihar on 4 December, 2025
Author: Purnendu Singh
Bench: Purnendu Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34892 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-271 Year-2014 Thana- MAJORGANJ District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Krishna Murari Jha @ Krishna Murari S/O Mahendra Jha Resident of Village-
Barharwa, P.S.- Majorganj, Dist- Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Hema Jha D/O Samrendra Kumar Jha R/O Village- Dhadhi, P.S- Nanpur,
Distt.- Sitamarhi.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mohammed Arif, APP
For the O.P. No.2 : Ms. Anjani Kumar Jha, Advocate
Ms. Anita Kumari Sharma, Advocate
Mr. Vishwa Shri Rajendra, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 04-12-2025
Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner; learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P. No.2
and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred the application under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. / 528 BNSS for quashing of the order dated
05.12.2024
passed in connection with Trial No.1319 of 2024
arising out of Majorganj (Suppi) P.S. Case No.271 of 2014 by
the learned Judicial Magistrate- Ist Class, Sitamarhi, whereby
cognizance has been taken under Sections 494, 497, 498A of the
IPC.
3. The prosecution story, in short is that marriage of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34892 of 2025 dt.04-12-2025
the informant/O.P. No.2 was solemnized with petitioner on
27.06.2007. The petitioner (husband), his married sister, and
other family members started demanding dowry from the O.P.
No.2, and when she protested, she was subjected to continuous
mental and physical torture due to non-fulfilment of demand of
dowry. The petitioner filed Matrimonial Case No. 65/2008 and
that the harassment continued to such an extent that O.P. No.2
became mentally unstable. Aggrieved by the said act, the O.P.
No.2 has filed the FIR bearing Majorganj (Suppi) P.S. Case
No.271 of 2014.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the learned District Court before taking
cognizance of the offence failed to consider that the offence as
alleged is not against the society. He further submitted that
even considering the offence as alleged, materials available on
record don't disclose any criminal element and without
considering this aspect, the order taking cognizance against the
petitioner becomes unsustainable in the eye of law. Learned
counsel submitted that the petitioner is a government teacher
and he is ready to pay Rs.25 lakhs immediately. Learned
counsel further submitted that marriage is a sacred ceremony
but little matrimonial skirmish suddenly erupts into hatred but
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34892 of 2025 dt.04-12-2025
the same can be resolved, if the parties are given opportunity to
ponder to reconcile their dispute outside the court.
5. Per contra, learned APP appearing on behalf of
the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P.
No.2 submitted that a chance be given to the parties for
amicable settlement outside the court.
6. The petitioner's counsel on instruction submitted
that the petitioner has agreed to appear before the learned
District Court at 10:30 A.M. on 17.12.2025.
7. Heard the parties.
8. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, the fact that the matrimonial
dispute is not an offense against the society rather a matrimonial
dispute is a private conflict between spouses and does not
inherently constitute an offence against society. However, a
false case can have a disastrous consequence in absence of any
criminal content. The personal dispute cannot call for a criminal
offence. In such situation, continuation of the proceeding would
amount to abuse of process of law leading to vexatious
proceeding against the petitioner.
9. In this regard, the Apex Court in the case of B.S.
Joshi v. State of Haryana, reported in, (2003) 4 SCC 675, in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34892 of 2025 dt.04-12-2025
paragraph nos. 12 and 13 has held as under:-
" 12. The special features in such
matrimonial matters are evident. It becomes the
duty of the court to encourage genuine
settlements of matrimonial disputes.
13. The observations made by
this Court, though in a slightly different
context, in G.V. Rao v. L.H.V. Prasad
[(2000) 3 SCC 693 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 733]
are very apt for determining the approach
required to be kept in view in a matrimonial
dispute by the courts. It was said that there
has been an outburst of matrimonial disputes
in recent times. Marriage is a sacred
ceremony, the main purpose of which is to
enable the young couple to settle down in life
and live peacefully. But little matrimonial
skirmishes suddenly erupt which often
assume serious proportions resulting in
commission of heinous crimes in which
elders of the family are also involved with
the result that those who could have
counselled and brought about
rapprochement are rendered helpless on
their being arrayed as accused in the
criminal case. There are many other reasons
which need not be mentioned here for not
encouraging matrimonial litigation so that
the parties may ponder over their defaults
and terminate their disputes amicably by
mutual agreement instead of fighting it out in
a court of law where it takes years and years
to conclude and in that process the parties
lose their "young" days in chasing their
"cases" in different courts.
10. The dispute between the parties is purely civil in
nature and the petitioner has willingly desired to pay Rs.25
Lakhs immediately and to appear before the learned District
Court on 17.12.2025 at 10:30 AM, so that the matter can be
referred to the District Mediation Centre.
11. Learned District Court is directed to take
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34892 of 2025 dt.04-12-2025
necessary steps to refer the matter before the learned Mediator
of the District Mediation Center after summoning O.P. No.2 by
fixing a date for appearance.
12. Learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center
concerned upon appearance of the parties on the fixed date shall
make his/her best efforts to settle the dispute amicably and
thereafter submit his/her report before the concerned learned
District Court, well within a period of four months, till then, no
coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in
connection with the aforesaid case.
13. In case, the parties resolve their dispute amicably,
or arrive at a mutual settlement then the proceeding is required
to be dropped in light of the law laid down by the Apex Court as
referred hereinabove.
14. In case of failure on the part of the petitioner to
appear on 17.12.2025 before the learned District Court or any
date fixed by the learned Mediator, the interim protection
granted to the petitioner shall automatically lose its force.
15. In case, it is deliberate on the part of the petitioner
and he fails to reconcile, then in that case, the learned District
Court shall proceed with the trial. In case, it is deliberate on the
part of the opposite party no.2 to reconcile, then in that case,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34892 of 2025 dt.04-12-2025
the interim protection granted to the petitioner shall continue
and the trial shall proceed in accordance with law.
16. Accordingly, the order taking cognizance is
modified to the above extent.
17. The application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 09.12.2025
Transmission Date 09.12.2025
