Patna High Court
Dr. Md. Zamir Hassan vs The State Of Bihar on 23 July, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42844 of 2023
Arising out of PS. Case No.-486 Year-2022 Thana- GARDANIBAG District- Patna
======================================================
Dr. Md. Zamir Hassan S/o Dr. Abdullah Ansari R/o- Islamnagar Ward No. 22,
Bhabua, P.S.- Ramgarh, Dist. Kaimur-821101, Bihar at present resident of
Mohalla-Dozana Apartment, Near Phulwari Station, Haroon Colony Sector-II,
Saket Bihar, PS. Phulwarisharif Town and Dist. Patna, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rabiya Ansari, D/o Ainuddin Ansari, R/o Village- Daharak, P.S. Ramgarh,
Dist. Kaimur, Bihar at present resident of Mohalla- Raghunath Tola, Sai Ni-
was Complex, Anisabad, PS. Gardanibagh, Patna-80002
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Anand Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s: Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 23-07-2025
Heard Dr. Anand Kumar, learned counsel for the peti-
tioner and Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR of Gardanibagh
P.S. Case No. 486 of 2022 dated 23.08.2022 registered for the of-
fences under Sections 341, 323, 313, 379, 376, 493 and 504 of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. Notices were issued to Opposite Party No. 2 on
02.12.2024
by both modes and despite valid service of notice to
opposite party no. 2 by registered cover with A/D and the same be-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42844 of 2023 dt.23-07-2025
ing received personally, she has neither appeared before this Court
personally nor through her counsel.
4. The prosecution case is to the effect that the infor-
mant, Rabiya Ansari was working as Jail Constable and claiming
herself to be divorcee and having a female child was given a pro-
posal for second marriage by the Petitioner, who was a Doctor. It
is further alleged that the petitioner, who was the proposed groom
had established physical relationship with her and on account of
which she became pregnant thrice and she was forced to be
aborted with medicines. It is alleged that the petitioner has threat-
ened her to make the photographs of their physical relation viral
on social media. It is also alleged that all named accused persons
demanded Rs. 10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs) and one Katha land of her
maika and on non-fulfilment of the same they threatened that she
along with her daughter will be killed and they tore her clothes and
made her naked and also on the birth certificate of her daughter pe-
titioner has given his name as father.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the pe-
titioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in a concocted
case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the pe-
titioner is a Doctor and the informant was under his treatment and
without taking divorce under Sariya/Mohamedan Law she was try-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42844 of 2023 dt.23-07-2025
ing to marry him. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also sub-
mitted that there was apprehension that he will be implicated in the
false case, therefore, he has filed an Informatory Petition No. 172
of 2023 on 17.01.2023 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna
as well as the Police has submitted Final Report/Charge Sheet No.
577 dated 15.12.2022 in the present case. Learned counsel for the
petitioner next submits that the present FIR has been filed with an
ulterior motive by the Opposite Party No. 2 only to grab his prop-
erty threatening the petitioner to implicate in a false and fabricated
case.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that
the alleged Nikahnama has been executed in connivance with the
local police and Kazi which is evident from the Nikahnama and
the photographs of the Police Hajat from which it could easily be
ascertained that the petitioner was in custody at the relevant time
and the Kazi was brought at the Thana where the alleged Nikah-
nama was prepared and the petitioner was forcefully made to sign
on the same.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has then pointed
out that the Opposite Party No. 2 had never taken divorce/Talak
from her first husband namely Kaushar Ansari and from the evi-
dence which he managed to collect it was found that the first hus-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42844 of 2023 dt.23-07-2025
band had filed a matrimonial case before the learned Principal
Judge, Family Court, Kaimur being Matrimonial Case No. 57 of
2016 under Mohammedan Law for restitution of conjugal right but
the said petition was disposed of on 19.04.2017 for non-appear-
ance. Learned counsel further draws attention of this Court to-
wards the certified copy of the order dated 29.06.2022 wherein the
first husband of the Opposite Party No. 2 had filed a Matrimonial
Divorce Case No. 100 of 2019 before the Court of Principal Judge,
Family Court, Kaimur at Bhabhua for dissolution of their marriage
and the said petition also stood dismissed without passing the or-
der of dissolution of marriage, thus, certifying the fact that Oppo-
site Party No. 2 has not been divorced from her first husband
namely Kaushar Ansari till date. At this juncture, learned counsel
for the petitioner submits that second marriage with the petitioner
even if be accepted cannot be legitimate marriage under Mo-
hammedan Law.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also stated that
the allegation of the child of Opposite Party No. 2 being born from
the relationship with the petitioner is also falsified from the fact
that the first husband namely Kaushar Ansari had furnished affi-
davit dated 12.10.2020 stating therein that Alia Khatoon is his
daughter who was born on 11.09.2014.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42844 of 2023 dt.23-07-2025
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out to-
wards the statement of the victim given under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
which has been brought on record by way of Annexure-9 wherein
she has stated that she had taken divorce from her first husband
namely Kaushar Ansari and she had admitted in her statement that
she was pressurizing the petitioner to marry her.
10. Learned counsel for the petitioner in sum and sub-
stance has submitted that the petitioner has become a victim of
honey trap and the relationship was completely consensual and the
present FIR is nothing but an abuse of the process of law. It is not
only the criminal proceeding going against the petitioner but it has
also tarnished the image of the petitioner.
11. Considering the aforesaid submission made by
learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the fact
that the Police has submitted Final Report against the other named
accused persons except the Petitioner raises the question over the
genuineness of the Prosecution, I am of the view that the continua-
tion of criminal proceeding in such circumstances would amount
to an abuse of the process of law and would result in miscarriage
of justice in the light of Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in the
case of State of Haryana and Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal and Ors
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42844 of 2023 dt.23-07-2025
[(1992) Supp (1) SCC 335], wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in paragraph 17 has held as under:-
"17. 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 back-
drop of the interpretation of the various rele-
vant 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 Ar-
ticle 226 or the inherent powers under Section
482 of the Code which we have extracted and
reproduced above, we give the following cate-
gories of cases by way of illustration wherein
such power could be exercised either to pre-
vent abuse of the process of any court or other-
wise 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 cog-
nizable 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 allega-
tions made in the FIR or complaint and the ev-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42844 of 2023 dt.23-07-2025
idence 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 con-
stitute only a non-cognizable offence, no inves-
tigation is permitted by a police officer without
an order of a Magistrate as contemplated un-
der Section 155(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in
the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inher-
ently improbable on the basis of which no pru-
dent 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 institu-
tion and continuance of the proceedings
and/or where there is a specific provision in
the Code or the Act concerned, providing effi-
cacious redress for the grievance of the ag-
grieved 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."
12. In view of the aforesaid submission and taking note
of the aforesaid legal proposition of Hon'ble Supreme Court and
finding that the allegation against the petitioner is frivolous in na-
ture and it is a malicious prosecution against the petitioner, there-
fore, the continuation of criminal proceeding in such circum-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42844 of 2023 dt.23-07-2025
stances would amount to an abuse of the process of law and would
result in a miscarriage of justice.
13. Accordingly, FIR of Gardanibagh P.S. Case No. 486
of 2022 dated 23.08.2022 registered for the offences under Sec-
tions 341, 323, 313, 379, 376, 493 and 504 of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act qua the above
named petitioner is hereby quashed.
14. In the result, the present quashing application stands
allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Vikash/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date
Transmission Date
