[Cites 9, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Sahid Khan @ Md. Sahid Khan 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.56885 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-933 Year-2022 Thana- CIVIL LINE District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Sahid Khan @ Md. Sahid Khan S/o Late Sahjahan Khan R/o - Flat No. 406,
Shamshi Enclave Karimganj, P.S - Civil Line, District - Gaya
2. Firdaus Parveer @ Firdosh W/o Sahid Khan @ Md. Sahid Khan R/o - Flat
No. 406, Shamshi Enclave Karimganj, P.S - Civil Line, District - Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Nazma Khatoon W/o Late Sahjahan Khan R/o Mohalla - Kathokar Talab,
P.S - Civil Lines, District - Gaya
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 04-12-2025
Heard Mr. Pramod Kumar, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Humayou Ahmad
Khan, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners have preferred the application
under Section 528 of BNSS for quashing the order of
cognizance dated 22.01.2025 passed by the learned Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Gaya in Civil Lines P.S. Case
No.933 of 2022, whereby the learned Magistrate has taken
cognizance under Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code against
the petitioners.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56885 of 2025 dt.04-12-2025
2/7
10.12.2022
, Sahid Khan (petitioner no.1) and his brother namely
Sabir Khan, both sons of Late Sahjahan Khan, along with
Firdaus Parveen (petitioner no.2), wife of the said Sahid Khan
(Petitioner no.1), and Mazia Khatoon, wife of the said Sabir
Khan, forcibly took away ornaments and a sum of Rs.
1,00,000/-. When the informant's younger son attempted to
restrain the aforesaid persons from removing the ornaments and
cash from the almirah, they allegedly assaulted him, as well as,
the wife and daughter of the informant. It is further alleged that
the accused persons named in the F.I.R. have been attempting to
dispossess the younger son from the residence and shop and are
even seeking to dispossess the informant from her home. The
informant asserts that she, her younger son, and her daughters,
apprehend danger to their lives at the hands of the accused
persons. Based on the written report of the informant, an FIR
was registered on 11.12.2022 at 9:00 a.m. as Civil Lines P.S.
Case No. 933 of 2022.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of
petitioners submitted that as per the basic ingredient of Section
504 IPC, the petitioners can't be said to have intentionally given
provocation, as such, the offence is not made out against the
petitioners for the allegation as alleged in the FIR. Learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56885 of 2025 dt.04-12-2025
counsel further submitted that the petitioners are ready to file
written apology to her mother (O.P. No.2) and other family
members who have got offended by the alleged illegal action of
the petitioners, to buy peace and maintain harmony in the
family. Learned counsel further submitted that the O.P. No.2 is a
widow of late Md. Sahjahan Khan, who has died leaving behind
him 5 sons and 5 daughters along with grandchildren. The
petitioner no.1 is the eldest among all the brothers. On the
alleged date of occurrence according to the petitioners, the
parties were negotiating to partition the property including the
iron scrap shop. Learned counsel submitted that in support of
the same, information is contained in para-7 of the quashing
application. While they were negotiating, all the family
members including the petitioners engaged in hot talk leading to
some misbehavior on the part of the petitioner no.1 with his
mother (O.P. No.2 ).
5. I find to analyze, as to whether, the Magistrate on
the basis of the material and evidences before him has given
consideration to the same or not? The intentional insult is one of
the ingredients to attract Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
The ingredients of Section 504 of IPC were explained by the
Apex Court in case of Mohd. Wajid v. State of U.P., reported in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56885 of 2025 dt.04-12-2025
(2023) 20 SCC 219 as under:-
"29. Section 504 IPC contemplates
intentionally insulting a person and thereby provoking such
person insulted to breach the peace or intentionally
insulting a person knowing it to be likely that the person
insulted may be provoked so as to cause a breach of the
public peace or to commit any other offence. Mere abuse
may not come within the purview of the section. But, the
words of abuse in a particular case might amount to an
intentional insult provoking the person insulted to commit a
breach of the public peace or to commit any other offence.
If abusive language is used intentionally and is of such a
nature as would in the ordinary course of events lead the
person insulted to break the peace or to commit an offence
under the law, the case is not taken away from the purview
of the section merely because the insulted person did not
actually break the peace or commit any offence having
exercised self-control or having been subjected to abject
terror by the offender.
30. In judging whether particular abusive
language is attracted by Section 504 IPC, the court has to
find out what, in the ordinary circumstances, would be the
effect of the abusive language used and not what the
complainant actually did as a result of his peculiar
idiosyncrasy or cool temperament or sense of discipline. It
is the ordinary general nature of the abusive language that
is the test for considering whether the abusive language is
an intentional insult likely to provoke the person insulted to
commit a breach of the peace and not the particular
conduct or temperament of the complainant."
6. In the present case, I don't find that there is any
intentional provocation when the parties were negotiating for
partition of property including the iron scrap shop as claimed by
the petitioner no.1 to be owned by him. The commission of the
offense cannot be said that petitioner no.1 has intentionally
insulted his mother (O.P. No.2), more so, the same has not
resulted into breach of public peace or any other offense as
alleged by any other person against the petitioners. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56885 of 2025 dt.04-12-2025
petitioner no.1 has admitted that he has ill behaved with his
mother and he is ready to file his written apology. In such
circumstances, in absence of any ingredient of Section 504
Indian Penal Code, I find that the petitioners must not be
subjected to face the criminal prosecution and keeping the
present quashing application pending will not serve the purpose.
In this regard, law is well settled in case of State of Haryana
and Ors. v. Bhajan Lal and Ors. reported in 1992 Supp. (1)
SCC 335, in which the Apex Court has held 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 information
report and other materials, if any, accompanying
the FIR do not disclose a cogizable 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 un-controverted
allegations made in the FIR or complaint and
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 allegation in the FIR
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56885 of 2025 dt.04-12-2025
do not constitute a cognizable offence hut constitute
only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is
permitted by a police officer without an order of a
magistrate as contemplated under section 159 (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 of
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 malafide 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
private grudge"
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court, the order
taking cognizance dated 22.01.2025 passed in Civil Lines P.S.
Case No. 933 of 2022 by the learned ACJM-I, Gaya is set aside
and quashed.
8. At the same time, I find that O.P. No.2 is 70
years old lady and in accordance with the Maintenance and
Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, the O.P.
No.2 can avail the remedy, if in future the petitioners subject her
to any cruelty or for any allegation which is maintainable under
the said Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56885 of 2025 dt.04-12-2025
9. Accordingly, the present application stands
disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 09.12.2025
Transmission Date 09.12.2025
