Patna High Court
Ram Sagar Ram vs The State Of Bihar on 30 October, 2025
Author: Purnendu Singh
Bench: Purnendu Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75764 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-211 Year-2024 Thana- RAXAUL District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Ram Sagar Ram S/o Baiju Ram R/o Mohalla - Lohiya Nagar, ward no. 28,
P.S. - Lohiya Nagar, Distt. - Begusarai
2. Smt. Kanchan Devi W/o Sri Ram Sagar Ram R/o Mohalla - Lohiya Nagar,
ward no. 28, P.S. - Lohiya Nagar, Distt. - Begusarai
3. Amit Kumar S/o Shri Ram Sagar Ram R/o Mohalla - Lohiya Nagar, ward
no. 28, P.S. - Lohiya Nagar, Distt. - Begusarai
4. Munna Kumar S/o Shri Ram Sagar Ram R/o Mohalla - Lohiya Nagar, ward
no. 28, P.S. - Lohiya Nagar, Distt. - Begusarai
5. Smt. Archna Kumari W/o Vivek Prakash At present Residing at Anandpuri,
Boaring Road, P.s. - S.K. Puri, Distt. - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Smt. Tannu Joshi W/o Amit Kumar, D/o Rajendra Ram R/o vill - Koiriya
Tola, ward no. 25, P.s.- Raxaul, Distt. - Motihari at East Champaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Samir Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Baidya Nath Thakur, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Mohammed Arif, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 30-10-2025
Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the
opposite party no.2.
2. The present application has been filed under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the FIR in connection with
Raxaul P.S. Case No. 211 of 2024 registered for offences
punishable under Sections 341, 323, 313, 504, 506, 34 and 498A
of the Indian Penal Code.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75764 of 2024 dt.30-10-2025
2/8
3. The allegation is of subjecting the informant -
opposite party no.2 to various sorts of torture due to non-
fulfillment of the demand of the dowry.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that petitioners no. 1 and 2 are father-in-
law and mother-in-law of the opposite party no. 2. Petitioner no.
3 is the husband of the opposite party no.2. Petitioner no. 4 is
own brother of the husband of the opposite party no. 2
(petitioner no. 3) and petitioner no. 5 is own sister of the
husband of the opposite party no. 2 (petitioner no. 3). He further
submitted that the petitioner no. 3 has already filed a Divorce
Case No. 81 of 2024 for dissolution of marriage, which is
pending before the Principle Judge, Family Court, Begusarai.
Learned counsel further submitted that marriage is a sacred
ceremony but for little matrimonial skirmish between husband
and wife, the petitioners are facing criminal prosecution for the
reason they are in-laws. The learned District Court has not
considered this aspect, which calls for interference of this Court.
5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the opposite party no. 2 submitted that the opposite party no. 2
being harassed has shown her desire that she wants to go for one
time settlement.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75764 of 2024 dt.30-10-2025
3/8
6. Heard the parties.
7. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, from perusal of the FIR, it is
evident that there is no specific allegation against the petitioners
no. 1, 4 and 5, who are father-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-
in-law of the opposite party no. 2.
8. The law in respect of matrimonial dispute between
husband and wife is well settled at the same time, the Apex
Court has held that the family members of husband should not
be roped unnecessarily.
9. It is commonly seen in the society that the entire
family members, as well as, relatives are made accused along
with the husband to face criminal prosecution. The Apex Court
has demarcated the manner in which the complaints are
entertained by the learned District Court, considering the
entirety of matters, particularly dealing with the misuse of
Section 498 of IPC, referring to its earlier judgment, finally
concluded that offences arising out of matrimonial dispute
particularly relating to dowry etc. or a family dispute where
wrong is committed to the victim by the offenders and his
family recently in the case of Navneesh Aggarwal & Ors. v.
State of Haryana & Anr. reported in 2025 INSC 963.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75764 of 2024 dt.30-10-2025
4/8
10. I find that there is no specific allegations against
the petitioners no. 1, 4 and 5 in the FIR, as such, no case under
Section 498A of IPC is made out against them, who are close
relatives. Accordingly, the entire proceedings in connection with
Raxaul P.S. Case No. 211 of 2024 is hereby set aside and
quashed to the extent it relates to petitioners no. 1, 4 and 5.
11. Petitioner no. 3 has already filed a Divorce Case
No. 81 of 2024 for dissolution of marriage.
12. The matrimonial dispute is not an offense against
the society rather a matrimonial dispute is a private conflict
between spouses and does not inherently constitute an offence
against society. The Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi v.
State of Haryana, reported in, (2003) 4 SCC 675, in paragraph
nos. 12 and 13 has held as under:-
" 12. The special features in such
matrimonial matters are evident. It becomes the
duty of the court to encourage genuine
settlements of matrimonial disputes.
13. The observations made by this
Court, though in a slightly different context, in
G.V. Rao v. L.H.V. Prasad [(2000) 3 SCC 693 :
2000 SCC (Cri) 733] are very apt for
determining the approach required to be kept in
view in a matrimonial dispute by the courts. It
was said that there has been an outburst of
matrimonial disputes in recent times. Marriage
is a sacred ceremony, the main purpose of which
is to enable the young couple to settle down in
life and live peacefully. But little matrimonial
skirmishes suddenly erupt which often assume
serious proportions resulting in commission of
heinous crimes in which elders of the family are
also involved with the result that those who
could have counselled and brought about
rapprochement are rendered helpless on their
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75764 of 2024 dt.30-10-2025
5/8
being arrayed as accused in the criminal case.
There are many other reasons which need not be
mentioned here for not encouraging matrimonial
litigation so that the parties may ponder over
their defaults and terminate their disputes
amicably by mutual agreement instead of
fighting it out in a court of law where it takes
years and years to conclude and in that process
the parties lose their "young" days in chasing
their "cases" in different courts.
13. Recently also, the Apex Court in the case of
Mange Ram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Another (Special
Leave Petition (Criminal) No.10817 of 2024), in paragraph nos.
25, 31 and 32 has reiterated that in cases, particularly, related to
dowry, opportunity be given to the parties first to reconcile,
which inter alia are as follows:-
"25. This Court, in Dara Lakshmi Narayana vs.
State of Telangana, (2025) 3 SCC 735, has made it
clear that family members of the husband ought not
to be unnecessarily roped into criminal proceedings
arising out of matrimonial discord. The Court
observed that it has become a recurring tendency to
implicate every member of the husband's family,
irrespective of their role or actual involvement,
merely because a dispute has arisen between the
spouses. It was further held that where the
allegations are bereft of specific particulars, and
particularly where the relatives sought to be
prosecuted are residing separately or have had no
connection with the matrimonial home, allowing the
prosecution to proceed would amount to an abuse of
the process of law. The Court noted that criminal
law is not to be deployed as an instrument of
harassment, and that judicial scrutiny must be
exercised to guard against such misuse.
31. We also refer to Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab,
(2012) 10 SCC 303 wherein this Court observed that
where the High Court quashes a criminal
proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute
between the offender and the victim has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75764 of 2024 dt.30-10-2025
6/8
settled, although the offences are not compoundable,
it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal
proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice
in the case demands that the dispute between the
parties is put to an end and peace is restored,
securing the ends of justice being the ultimate
guiding factor. In this regard, a specific reference
was made to offences arising out of matrimony,
particularly relating to dowry, etc. or a family
dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim
but the offender and the victim have settled all
disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the
fact that such offences have not been made
compoundable. The High Court may, within the
framework of its inherent power, quash the criminal
proceeding or criminal complaint or FIR if it is
satisfied that on the face of such settlement, there is
hardly any likelihood of the offender being
convicted and by not quashing the criminal
proceedings, justice shall be casualty and ends of
justice shall be defeated.
32. In Naushey Ali vs. State of U.P., (2025) 4 SCC
78, one of us (Viswanathan, J.) observed in
paragraph 32 that proceeding with the trial, when
the parties have amicably resolved the dispute,
would be futile and the ends of justice require that
the settlement be given effect to by quashing the
proceedings. It would be a grave abuse of process
particularly when the dispute is settled and
resolved."
14. The petitioner no. 2 and 3, who are the mother-
in-law and husband of the O.P. No. 2 may proceed to settle the
strained matrimonial relationship amicably, the learned District
Court shall also strive till last to settle the dispute outside the
Court
15. Petitioners no. 2 and 3 and opposite party no. 2
have agreed to appear before the learned District Court on
08.12.2025
at 10:30 AM.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75764 of 2024 dt.30-10-2025
16. Learned District Court is directed to take
necessary steps to refer the matter before the learned Mediator
of the District Mediation Center.
17. Learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center
concerned shall make his/her best efforts to settle the dispute
between the parties amicably and thereafter submit his/her
report before the concerned learned District Court, well within a
period of four months, till then, no coercive action shall be
taken against the petitioners no. 2 and 3 in connection with the
aforesaid case.
18. In case, the parties resolve their dispute amicably,
then the proceeding is required to be dropped in light of the law
laid down by the Apex Court as referred hereinabove.
19. In case of failure on the part of the petitioners no.
2 and 3 to appear on 08.12.2025 before the learned District
Court or any date fixed by the learned Mediator, the interim
protection granted to the petitioners no. 2 and 3 shall
automatically lose its force.
20. In case, it is deliberate on the part of the
petitioners no. 2 and 3 and they fail to reconcile, then in that
case, the learned District Court shall proceed with the trial. In
case, it is deliberate on the part of the opposite party no.2 to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75764 of 2024 dt.30-10-2025
reconcile, then in that case, continuing with the criminal
proceeding will amount to abuse of process of court and the
interim protection granted to petitioners no. 2 and 3 shall
continue and the proceeding against them is required to be
dropped in accordance with law.
21. Accordingly, the present quashing application
stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 05.11.2025
Transmission Date 05.11.2025
