Patna High Court
Badrun Duja @ Jugnu @ Bahar @ Badruddoza 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.60470 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-415 Year-2022 Thana- MADHUBANI COMPLAINT CASE
District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Badrun Duja @ Jugnu @ Bahar @ Badruddoza, son of Late Abdul Hasib
2. Afroza Khatoon, wife of Late Abdul Hasib
3. Nurul Saba @ Mosam, D/o- Late Abdul Hasib
All are resident of Village- Parsaini, P.S.- Bisfi, Dist- Madhubani
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Madina Firdaush Sheikh, wife of Baddruja @ Jugnu, D/o- Baksi Gulan
Sheikh, resident of Village- Parsauni, P.S.- Bisfi (Pautana), Dist- Madhubani
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Md. Helal Ahmad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP
For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Kuldeep Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 15-02-2025
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
APP for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of
of O.P. No.2
2. The present application has been filed by the
petitioners for quashing of order taking cognizance dated
15.12.2022
passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class,
Benipatti in Complaint C.R. No.415 of 2022 dated
17.10.2022, whereby the learned trial court has taken
cognizance against the petitioners for the offences punishable
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60470 of 2023 dt.15-02-2025
under Sections 498-A, 323 and 506 read with 34 of the
Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC').
3. The brief facts of the case is that the informant
got married to the petitioner No.1 Badrun Duja in the year
2017. At the time of beginning of marriage, the accused
persons including petitioners told her to bring two lakh rupees
from her parents as dowry. When she expressed her inability
to fulfill their demand, they subjected the informant to cruelty
in different ways and she was also threatened to kill her. It is
further alleged that on 28.01.2022 at about 8:00 P.M.,
accused persons assaulted the informant and confined her in a
room and attempted to kill her by sprinkling kerosene oil. On
hearing alarm raised by her, nearby people gathered over
there and saved the informant.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners that the matter appears settled between the
parties in terms of Mediation Proceeding No.1239 of 2023
arising out of Cr. Misc. No. 58387 of 2023 and in furtherance
of the same, an agreement was drawn on 05.02.2024
between the parties deciding terms and conditions of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60470 of 2023 dt.15-02-2025
compromise. It is submitted that in furtherance of said
compromise, the petitioner No.1/husband of O.P. No.2 paid
Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs) as one-time settlement
qua maintenance amount to opposite party no.2, namely
Madina Firdaush Sheikh, which was credited to her bank
account No.20429977809 of SBI, Chittakula (Sadashivgad).
The mediation agreement was also brought on record through
supplementary affidavit.
5. Mr. Kuldeep Kumar, learned counsel appearing
for opposite party no.2 has also approved the factum of
compromise between the parties.
6. It would be apposite to re-produce the
settlement terms as drawn by Patna High Court Mediation
Centre, which is as under :-
"Patna High Court Mediation Centre
Memorandum of Agreement
Mediation Proceeding No.1239 of 2023
[Arising out of Cr. Misc. No.58387 of 2023]
An agreement made on 05.02.2024 at the High
Court Patna Mediation Centre, between,
Badrun Duja @ Jugnu Bahar @ Badruddoza,
Son of Late Abdul Hasib, resident of Village-
Parsaini, P.S.-Bišfi, District-Madhubani.
... ...... Petitioner/(First party).
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60470 of 2023 dt.15-02-2025
And
Madina Firdaush Sheikh, wife of Baddruja @
Jugnu, D/o Baksi Gulan Sheikh, resident of
Village-Parsauni, P.S.-Bisfi (Pautana), District-
Madhubani.
--- Opposite Party No.2/(Second
party).
Both the parties appeared in the Mediation
Proceeding along with their Advocates and
ready to resolve the dispute through the
Mediation Proceeding on the following terms
and conditions:-
1. That after great persuasion both the parties
agreed to live separately and for this the
petitioner offered to pay Rs.7,00,000/-
(Rupees Seven Lakh Only) as full and final one
time settlement amount to the Opposite party
No.2 (Madina Firdaush Sheikh). Opposite party
No.2 accepted the offer and gave her consent.
2. That both the parties agreed that the
aforesaid amount shall be paid in five equal
instalments in five months w.e.f. today. The
payment shall be through RTGS/NEFT issued
on the name of opposite party No.2 namely
Madina Firdaush Sheikh in the Bank account
number 20429977809, IFSC Chittakula
(Sadashivgad). Code-SBIN0007905, State
Bank, Chittakula (Sadashivgad).
3. This settlement shall be full and final
settlement and no party shall claim any
maintenance or articles in future against each
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60470 of 2023 dt.15-02-2025
other, in any manner.
4. That both the parties agreed to file mutual
consent as per Muslim Law and after that both
the parties are free to lead their life as per
their own will.
5. That both the parties agreed that any case
filed against each other shall be withdrawn by
each of the party.
6. That the above contents of the agreement
have been read over and explained to us in
Hindi which are have fully understood and
accepted there upon.
7. That in the above terms and conditions a
settlement has been arrived at between the
parties and both have signed in presence of
their learned counsels, who have also put their
signature on this agreement.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Badrun Duja @ Jugnu) (Madina Firdaush
Sheikah)
Signature of the petitioner Signature of O.P.
No.2
Dated-05.02.2024 Dated-05.02.2024
Sd/- Sd/-
Signature of Advocate for petitioner Sign. Of advocate
O.P. No.2
A.O.R. No.EN. 5889/95 A.O.R. No.100326
Dated-05.02.2024 Dated-05.02.2024
"
7. It would be apposite to reproduce para-13, 14,
15, 16 & 17 of the legal report of Hon'ble Supreme Court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60470 of 2023 dt.15-02-2025
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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60470 of 2023 dt.15-02-2025
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. (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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60470 of 2023 dt.15-02-2025
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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60470 of 2023 dt.15-02-2025
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 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 matter appears
settled/compromised between the parties, where opposite
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60470 of 2023 dt.15-02-2025
party no.2/wife has received Rs.7,00,000/- as one time
settlement in her bank account and they also obtained the
decree of divorce, accordingly, continuing with present
proceeding before learned trial court would only amount to
abuse of the process of court of law.
9. Accordingly, the impugned order taking
cognizance dated 15.12.2022 passed by learned Judicial
Magistrate-1st Class, Benipatti in Complaint C.R. No.415 of
2022 with all its consequential proceedings is, hereby,
quashed and set aside qua petitioners.
10. The application stand allowed.
11. Let a copy of this judgment be communicated
to the learned Trial Court immediately.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Sanjeet/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 27-02-2025
Transmission Date 27-02-2025
