Patna High Court
Saroj Kumar Chaudhary @ Saroj Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 20 March, 2025
Author: Chandra Shekhar Jha
Bench: Chandra Shekhar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52152 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-350 Year-2021 Thana- LALGANJ District- Vaishali
======================================================
Saroj Kumar Chaudhary @ Saroj Kumar, S/o Ram Swarup Chaudhary,
resident of Village- Cherki, P.S.- Cherki, Dist- Gaya
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Anju Kumari, D/o Ram Ishwar Chaudhary, R/o- Totaha P.S.- Lalganj Dist-
Vaishali
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha, APP
For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 20-03-2025
Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned counsel appearing for O.P. No.2.
2. The present application has been filed for
quashing of First Information Report (in short 'FIR') of
Lalganj P.S. Case No.350 of 2021 dated 04.10.2021
registered for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of
the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and Sections 3 and 4 of
the Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioner and other
accused persons.
3. During the course of argument, it is submitted by
learned counsel appearing for petitioner that matter has now
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52152 of 2023 dt.20-03-2025
been compromised between the parties in view of written
compromise dated 28.10.2024 jointly signed by the parties,
which was filed before the learned A.C.J.M.-2nd, Vaishali at
Hajipur. The certified copy of the said compromise made
available to this Court by learned counsel appearing for O.P.
No.2, which was taken on record.
4. Learned counsel appearing for O.P. No.2 has
approved the factum of compromise between the parties.
5. It would be apposite to reproduce para-13, 14,
15, 16 & 17 of the legal report of Hon'ble Supreme Court as
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52152 of 2023 dt.20-03-2025
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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52152 of 2023 dt.20-03-2025
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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52152 of 2023 dt.20-03-2025
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 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."
6. Upon perusal of the aforesaid joint compromise
duly signed by the parties, it appears that they have decided
to withdraw all the criminal cases pending between them and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52152 of 2023 dt.20-03-2025
furthermore, the O.P. No.2 also decided to withdraw
Maintenance Case No.262 of 2022 pending before the
learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Vaishali at Hajipur.
7. In view of compromise, as aforesaid, and the
legal ratio as available through Abhishek case (supra),
continuing with present criminal proceeding before the trial
court would only amount to abuse of the process of court of
law.
8. Accordingly, the FIR of Lalganj P.S. Case
No.350 of 2021 dated 04.10.2021 qua petitioner is hereby
quashed and set aside.
9. The application stands allowed.
10. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned
trial court forthwith
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Sanjeet/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 22-03-2025
Transmission Date 22-03-2025
