Patna High Court
Akhilesh Kumar Choudhary vs The State Of Bihar on 15 February, 2025
Author: Chandra Shekhar Jha
Bench: Chandra Shekhar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86109 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Siwan
======================================================
1. Akhilesh Kumar Choudhary, S/o Ashok Kumar Choudhary, R/o Sector-3E,
Qtr. No. 273, Bokaro Sector-3, P.O. + P.S.-Bokaro Steel City, Distt.-
Bokaro, Jharkhand and currently residing at C/o Rajendra Kumar, Diwakar
Nagar, near Balumath Block, Latehar, P.O. and P.S.- Balumath, Distt.-
Latehar, Jharkhand
2. Priyanka Kumari, D/o Dharni Dhar Singh, R/o Near Hanuman Mandir,
Phusro, P.S .- Bermo, Maakoli, Bokaro, Jharkhand
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rima Kumari @ Rima Devi, W/o Akhilesh Kumar Choudhary, D/o Jay
Prakash Choudhary, R/o Purani Bazar (Pasnauli), Ward No.6, P.O. -
Maharajganj, P.S. - Maharajganj, Dist.- Siwan
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Vibhuti Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP
For the O.P. No.2 : Ms. Shilpi Singh, Advocate
Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 15-02-2025
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP appearing for State duly assisted by learned
counsel for the O.P. No.2.
2. The present application has been filed by the
petitioners for quashing the First Information Report (in short
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86109 of 2024 dt.15-02-2025
2/13
'F.I.R.') of Mahila P.S. Case No.4 of 2024 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 323, 379, 494, 498-A,
504, 406 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code (in short 'I.P.C.')
as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act (in
short 'D.P. Act').
3. The prosecution case, in brief, as per informant,
namely, Rima Kumari @ Rima Devi is that the marriage of
informant/O.P. No.2 was solemnized on 23.01.2022 with
petitioner No.1. The parents of the informant has given Rs.
14 lakhs in cash, fridge, washing machine, cooler, sofa etc.
worth of Rs.2 lakhs and jewellery worth of Rs. 5 lakhs by way
of gift and Rs. 1 lakh was also given to the petitioner for chain
(sikdi). She further alleged that a demand for four wheeler
was also made at the time of vidai by the petitioners.
Thereafter, the informant visited her matrimonial house,
where everything was fine for few days but, after three days,
father of petitioner no.1, namely, Akhilesh Kumar Choudhary
told that if the marriage of his son was solemnized
somewhere else, he would have been given a four wheeler as
dowry. The informant conveyed the demand of petitioner no.1
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86109 of 2024 dt.15-02-2025
3/13
and other accused person to her parents. Thereafter, the
father of informant visited the matrimonial house of
informant and expressed his inability to fulfill their demand
but, accused persons were not agreed upon and they started
harassing the informant in many ways. It is further alleged
that petitioner no.1 is Manager at Central Bank and left the
informant after beating her and in his absence, other accused
persons harassed the informant for dowry. On 10.06.2023,
when petitioner no.1 returned, he along with other accused
assaulted the informant after snatching her stridhan ousted
her from house whereafter petitioner no.1 left her at Siwan
Station. It is also alleged that petitioner no.1 has now married
with another lady (petitioner no.2) and they are not ready to
keep the informant without four wheeler in dowry.
4. On the basis of aforesaid allegation, the
informant/O.P. No.2 has filed a complaint case being Cr. Case
Complaint (P) No. 2324 of 2023 dated 02.12.2023 before
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan. Subsequently, the
same was referred to the police for registration of FIR.
Consequently, Mahila P.S. Case No.4 (5135029240004) of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86109 of 2024 dt.15-02-2025
4/13
2024 registered under Sections 323, 379, 494, 498-A, 504,
406 read with 34 of I.P.C. as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the
D.P. Act.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners that the matter/disputes settled between the
parties, where both parties have decided to dissolve their
marriage by way of mutual divorce against one-time
settlement qua maintenance for Rs. 12,00,000/ (Rupees
Twelve Lakhs only). It is submitted that acting further on said
compromise, which is Annexure-P/2 of the present petition,
petitioner paid Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) to
O.P. No.2/wife through two different demand drafts, which
was issued by Central Bank of India, bearing No.148744 for
Rs. 5 lakhs and another draft of Rs.5 lakhs also, bearing No.
148745. The remaining amount of Rs. 2 lakh as per
compromise be paid to O.P. No.2 by the petitioner no.1 on
disposal of divorce petition in terms of compromise. It is
submitted that in view of compromise, as submitted above,
the continuing with present proceeding before the trial court
would only amount to abuse of the process of court.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86109 of 2024 dt.15-02-2025
5/13
6. Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel appearing
for O.P. No.2 approved the factum of compromise as
submitted above by learned counsel appearing for petitioners.
7. It would be apposite to re-produce the
settlement terms of agreement, which is as under:-
"ददनांक- 12.08.2024
समझौता जापन सह शपथ पत्र
अदखलेश कुमार चौधरी आयु लगभग 39 वरर । पु तर् -
अशोक कुमार चौधरी, दनवासी मायागंज, पोसट-
मायागंज, थाना. बरारी, दजला- भागलपुर
..... ....... प्रथम पक
और
रीमा कुमारी @ रीमा दे वी, पतनी-अदखलेश कुमार
चौधरी, पु तर् ी जय प्रकाश चौधरी, दनवासी पुरानी
बाजार (पसनौली), वारर नं. 6 पी.ओ. महाराजगंज,
थाना-महाराजगंज, दजला- दसवान
..... ..... द्दवतीय पक
दक पकों ने अपने शु भदचंतकों और दरशते दारों तथा
अपने वकीलों के हसतके प से दनमनदलदखत दनयमों व शतोर
पर नयायालय के बाहर अपने समसत दववादों को
ू र ढंग से सुलझा दलया है :-
सौहादरपर
(i) यह दक द्दवतीय पक सभी दववादों का
दनपटारा करने तथा संबंदधत नयायालयों मे लंदबत सभी
मामलों को वापस लेने पर सहमत हो गए है ।
(ii) यह दक दववादों का दनपटारा करने के
दलए प्रथम पक द्दवतीय पक को एकमु शत सथायी रादश
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86109 of 2024 dt.15-02-2025
6/13
के रप मे 12,00,000/- रपये (बारह लाख रपये ) का
भु गतान करने के दलए तैयार है ।
यह दक सभी पक दनमनदलदखत दनयमों व
शतोर पर सहमत है :
A. यह की आपसी सहमदत है दक प्रथम पक
तीन दकसतों मे ददद् वतीय पक को एकमु शत भु गतान के
रप मे 12,00,000 रपये (बारह लाख रपये ) का
भु गतान करने के दलए तैयार है ।
B. यह की प्रथम पक दारा से टर् ल बै क ऑफ
इंदरया, दरमांर र्राफट Dated 09.08.2024, No.
148744 के माधयम से Rs.5,00,000/- (पाँच लाख
रपए) का भु गतान आज दकया जाएगा और अगली भाग
का भु गतान जो की Rs. 5,00,000/- (पाँच लाख
रपए) है उसे दवदान नयायालय के समक Mutual
Divorce under section 13(B) of Hindu
Marriage Act. (जो की दोनो पकों दारा सामूदहक रप
से दाएर दकया जाएगा) के मामले के Admission के
समय से टर् ल बै क ऑफ इंदरया, दरमांर र्राफट Dated
09.08.2024
, No. 148745 के माधयम से दकया
जाएगा इसके अलावा द्दवतीय पक यह वचन दे ती है दक
वह प्रथम पक के दखलाफ उसके दारा दायर भरर-पोरर
का मामला वापस ले गी, जो दक दवदान पादरवादरक
नयायालय, सीवान के समक लंदबत भरर-पोरर का
मामला संखया 70/2024 है ।
C. यह की दक द्दवतीय पक यह शपथ ले ती
है की वह अपने दारा दजर मामला वापस ले गी जो दक
प्रथम पक और उसके दमत्र एवं पदरवार के सदसय
अशोक कुमार चौधरी, मंजू दे वी, दप्रयंका कुमारी और
अदभरे क कुमार चौधरी के दखलाफ भारतीय दंर संदहता
की धारा 323, 379, 494, 498 ए, 504, 406, 34
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86109 of 2024 dt.15-02-2025
और दहेज प्रदतरे ध अदधदनयम की धारा 34 के तहत
सीवान मदहला थाना कांर संखया 4/2024 के तहत दजर
है । इसके अलावा यदद आवशयक हुआ तो वह उपरोकत
प्राथदमकी को रद कराने के दलए नयायालय मे उपदसथत
होगी।
D. यह की शे र 2,00,000/- रपये (दो
लाख रपये ) की रादश प्रथम पक दारा आपसी सहमदत
से दायर दकया गया दववाह दवकछे द केस के अंदतम
दनपटारे के समय तथा द्दवतीय पक दारा दजर आपरादधक
मामला सीवान मदहला थाना कांर संखया 4/2024 के
साथ दी जाएगी।
E. यह की प्रथम पक, द्दवतीय पक के
दवरद अपने दारा पहले से दायर तलाक के ★ मामले को
वापस ले ले गा, जो दक दवदवान पादरवादरक नयायालय,
भागलपुर के समक लंदबत वै वादहक (तलाक) मामला
संखया 108/2023 है ।
F. यह की दक प्रथम पक दारा द्दवतीय पक
को सारा भु गतान दरमांर र्राफट के माधयम से करे गा।
G. यह दक रादश के लेन-दे न के बाद दोनों
पक एक-दूसरे के दवरद कोई दावा नहीं दकया जाएगा
और दोनो पक एक-दूसरे की चल या अचल संपदत के
दवरद भदवषय मे कोई दावा/भरर-पोरर नहीं करने का
शपथ ले ते है ।
H. आज 12/8/24 को दोनो पकों दारा
Civil Court, Siwan मे सतयादपत और शपथ ली गई
अदखलेश कुमार चौधरी रीमा कुमारी
12/08/2024 12/8/24
(प्रथम पक के हसताकर) (द्दवतीय पक के
हसताकर)"
8. It would be apposite to reproduce para-13, 14,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86109 of 2024 dt.15-02-2025
15, 16 & 17 of the legal report of Hon'ble Supreme Court
passed in the case of Abhishek vs. State of Madhya
Pradesh reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 1083, which are
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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86109 of 2024 dt.15-02-2025
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
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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86109 of 2024 dt.15-02-2025
(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 Chapter XIV and of the principles of law
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86109 of 2024 dt.15-02-2025
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86109 of 2024 dt.15-02-2025
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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86109 of 2024 dt.15-02-2025
him due to private and personal
grudge."
9. In view of aforementioned factual and legal
submissions and by taking note of fact as both the parties
have decided to dissolve their marriage by way of mutual
divorce against one-time settlement of Rs.12 lakhs for which,
Rs. 10 lakhs already paid to O.P. No.2 by the petitioners, it
appears that as on date, no dispute survives between the
parties, therefore, continuing with present proceeding before
learned trial court would only amount to abuse of the process
of court of law.
10. Accordingly, the F.I.R. of Mahila P.S. Case
No.4 of 2024 with all its consequential proceedings is hereby
quashed and set aside.
11. The application stands allowed.
12. Let a copy of the judgment be sent to the
learned trial court forthwith.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Sanjeet/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 27-02-2025
Transmission Date 27-02-2025
