[Cites 11, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Chandra Bhushan Prasad vs The State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12841 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-476 Year-2018 Thana- AGAMKUAN District- Patna
======================================================
1. Chandra Bhushan Prasad Son of late Prahlad Chaudhary Resident of Village
- H/G Flat no.4/38 Sector - 7, Block- 4, Bahaduerpur Housing Colony, P.S.-
Agamkuan, Distt.- Patna.
2. Rama Kumari W/o Chandra Bhushan Prasad Resident of Village - H/G Flat
no.4/38 Sector - 7, Block- 4, Bahaduerpur Housing Colony, P.S.-Agamkuan,
Distt.- Patna.
3. Harjit Rahul Son of Chandra Bhushan Prasad Resident of Village - H/G Flat
no.4/38 Sector - 7, Block- 4, Bahaduerpur Housing Colony, P.S.-Agamkuan,
Distt.- Patna.
4. Rashmi Kumari W/o Arvind Kumar Resident of Village - Shekhpura, P.S.-
Shastri Nagar, Dist.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pinki Kumari D/O Chandrika Chaudhary Resident of Gola Road, Danapur,
P.S.- Danapur, Distt - Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Md. Anisur Rahman, Adv.
Md. Khalid Anwar, Adv.
For the State Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, Adv.
For the O.P. No. 2 Mr. Radha Mohan Singh, Adv.
Mr. Dewendra Nr. Singh, Adv.
Mr. Utsav Anand, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 12-01-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned APP for the
State.
2. The present application has been filed on behalf of
the petitioners for quashing of the order dated 19.06.2019
passed by the learned A.C.J.M., Patna City in Agamkuan P.S.
Case No. 476 of 2018 (G.R. No. 3404 of 2018) whereby and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12841 of 2020 dt.12-01-2026
2/12
whereunder the learned court below has taken cognizance of the
offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 494, 341, 323, 504
and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the
'IPC') and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the
petitioners and summons have been issued.
3. The present petitioners are the father-in-law,
mother-in-law, brother-in-law and the married sister-in-law of
the opposite party no. 2, who have been made an accused in
Agamkuan P.S. Case No. 476 of 2018 dated 09.07.2028 with the
allegations of demand of dowry and torture having been
committed upon the informant i.e. opposite party no. 2. There
are also allegations of some physical assault and that of
contracting of a second marriage by the husband of the
informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted
that it would be evident from a bare perusal of the first
information report that the allegations made therein are general
and omnibus in nature with no specific allegations on these
petitioners. It has also been submitted that the husband of the
informant, Ranjit Rahul, made all efforts to protect the conjugal
relations with the informant and even filed a matrimonial case
for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12841 of 2020 dt.12-01-2026
3/12
Marriage Act vide Matrimonial Case No. 5481 of 2018 before
the court of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna
wherein notices were also issued to the informant, however, she
chose not to appear in the said matrimonial case and the matter
was put for ex-parte hearing leading to a decree of restitution of
conjugal rights having been passed in favour of the husband. As
far as the case of these petitioners are concerned, a specific
averment has been made in paragraph-9 of the petition that the
informant and her husband had been living separately from the
petitioners and they had no concern with the day to day family
affairs of the informant or her husband. It has further been
submitted that totally vague and baseless allegations of demand
of dowry and subjecting the informant to torture has been
imputed against the petitioners whereas they have never
indulged in the acts as alleged by the informant and only by
virtue of they being the family members of the husband of the
informant they have maliciously been arrayed as accused in the
present case. The counsel for the petitioners has thus submitted
that the present prosecution against the petitioners is totally a
frivolous and vexatious one and is fit to be quashed.
5. Per contra, the learned APP for the State and the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12841 of 2020 dt.12-01-2026
4/12
have vehemently opposed the quashing of the impugned order
taking cognizance on the ground that a prima facie case is made
out against the accused persons, and hence, there is no illegality
in the order impugned, as such, it warrants no interference.
6. This Court had the occasion to go through the first
information report and the allegations made therein which only
disclose general and omnibus allegations and rather relates to
some pressure being exerted on the informant for applying for a
loan for the purposes of purchase of a house. The allegations
further relate to keeping of some articles belonging to the
informant and a specific allegation with regard to a second
marriage has been made against her husband Ranjit Rahul while
maintaining that she is a working woman and she was ill treated
when she had gone to her matrimonial house to collect her
belongings. Before going on to the law laid down by way of
various judicial pronouncements made by the Hon'ble Apex
Court with regard to criminalizing domestic disputes without
specific allegations and credible materials to support the same, it
would be first necessary to adjudicate on the issue as to whether
the allegations made in the first information report make out a
case under Section 498A of the IPC. At this stage, it would be
relevant to quote the provision of Section 498A of the IPC
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12841 of 2020 dt.12-01-2026
5/12
which is as follows:
"498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman
subjecting her to cruelty.-Whoever, being the husband
or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects
such woman to cruelty shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to three
years and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation.- For the purpose of this section, "cruelty"
means-
(a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is
likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to
cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health
(whether mental or physical) of the woman; or
(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is
with a view to coercing her or any person related to
her to meet any unlawful demand for any property
or valuable security or is on account of failure by
her or any person related to her to meet such
demand."
7. From a bare perusal of the above-mentioned
provision, it would be apparent that the said provision has been
divided into two parts wherein the first part deals with any
willful conduct being of such nature likely to drive the woman
to commit suicide or to cause grave injuries or danger to her
life. The assertions made in the first information report do not
make out a case which have such serious and disastrous
consequences leading the woman to commit suicide or to cause
grave injury upon her, in background of the fact that it was the
informant who had left the matrimonial household and did not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12841 of 2020 dt.12-01-2026
6/12
participate in the proceedings of the family court relating to
restitution of conjugal rights, leading to the inference that she
was not interested in resuming conjugal relations and
performing her marital obligations. The second part of the
provision, dealing with harassment with a view to coercing her
for meeting any unlawful demand for property also needs to be
established by a series of acts to constitute harassment in its
literal meaning and spirit. Merely making reference to some
demands being made from the informant and her articles not
being returned, coupled with the allegation of asking her to take
some loan for purchasing a house, would not amount to
harassment and cruelty as contemplated under Section 498A of
the IPC.
8. Coming to the question of complicity of these
petitioners, the allegations of subjecting the informant to any
torture, is totally vague, general and omnibus as also sweeping
in nature. It has been laid down by several judicial
pronouncements that when the family relationships are sought to
be brought within the ambit of criminal proceedings, the courts
should be circumspect and judicious and should allow
invocation of criminal processes only when there are specific
allegations with supporting materials which clearly constitute
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12841 of 2020 dt.12-01-2026
7/12
criminal offences. All acts of a dissatisfied and disgruntled wife
on account of matrimonial discord, cannot be brought within the
purview of Section 498A of the IPC, as such, the courts have to
be extremely careful and cautious while dealing with such cases
by strictly examining whether there are specific allegations with
instances against the perpetrators as against generalised
allegations. There is no doubt about the fact that importance has
to be given to the victims of domestic violence, but all the
family members and relatives ought not to be brought within
the ambit of criminal prosecution in a general and sweeping
manner.
9. In the case of Kahkashan Kausar & Ors. Vs
State of Bihar & Ors reported in (2022) 6 SCC 599 the
Hon'ble Supreme Court considered all the earlier judgments
rendered in connection with quashing of prosecution against
relatives with generalised allegations with no specific instances
being carved out as against them, starting from the case of
Preeti Gupta & Anr. Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Anr.
reported in (2010) 7 SCC 667, wherein it was observed that it
was a matter of common experience that most of the complaints
under Section 498A IPC are filed in the heat of the moment over
trivial issues without proper deliberations and such complaints
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12841 of 2020 dt.12-01-2026
8/12
are filed with certain oblique motives. With regard to the
prosecution faced by the members of the family it has been
clearly laid down in the case of Kahkashan Kausar (supra) that
such persons ought not to go through the rigors of the
prosecution and trial as an eventual acquittal also inflicts severe
scars upon the accused. Paragraph 21 of the above-mentioned
judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Kahkashan
Kausar (supra) is being quoted hereunder:
"21. Therefore, upon consideration of the
relevant circumstances and in the absence of any
specific role attributed to the appellant-accused,
it would be unjust if the appellants are forced to
go through the tribulations of a trial i.e. general
and omnibus allegations cannot manifest in a
situation where the relatives of the complainant's
husband are forced to undergo trial. It has been
highlighted by this Court in varied instances, that
a criminal trial leading to an eventual acquittal
also inflicts severe scars upon the accused, and
such an exercise must, therefore, be discouraged.
12. This Court would also gainfully refer to the
recent case of Dara Laxmi Narayana Vs. the State of
Telangana (2025) 3 SCC 735 wherein the Hon'ble Apex has
made it clear that family members of the husband of the
informant ought not to be unnecessarily roped into criminal
proceedings arising out of matrimonial discord. It was further
held that in a case where the allegations are totally bereft of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12841 of 2020 dt.12-01-2026
9/12
specific accusations particularly in the background that the
relatives are even staying separately from the informant and her
husband, allowing such malicious and motivated prosecution to
continue would amount to an abuse of the process of the court.
The above-mentioned judgment rendered by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court has been noticed and reiterated in the recent case
of Mange Ram Vs State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. (2025)
INSC 962 to hold that continuation of the criminal proceedings
against family members, especially in the absence of specific
and proximate allegations, serves no legitimate purpose and in
appropriate cases the power to quash such proceedings is
essential to uphold fairness and bring about a quietus to personal
disputes.
13. The adverse effects of criminalizing of domestic
disputes without specific allegations to support the same have
also been very recently considered by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Geddam Jhansi & Anr. Vs. State of
Telangana & Anr. reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 263 where
their lordships have also noticed a growing tendency to
implicate other members of the family who are not connected
with the allegation of harassment and torture and a further
tendency to exaggerate allegations giving them a criminal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12841 of 2020 dt.12-01-2026
10/12
colour. The Hon'ble Apex Court has also observed that the
courts dealing with the issue need to assess as to whether such
allegations are genuine with specific criminal role assigned to
each member of the family or whether it is merely a spill over
and side effect of matrimonial discord. Paragraphs 31, 32, 35,
36 and 39 of the above-mentioned case of Geddam Jhansi
(supra) are being quoted hereunder:-
"31. Invoking criminal process is a serious matter with penal
consequences involving coercive measures, which can be
permitted only when specific act(s) which constitute offences
punishable under the Penal Code or any other penal statute
are alleged or attributed to the accused and a prima facie case
is made out. It applies with equal force when criminal laws are
invoked in domestic disputes. Criminalising domestic disputes
without specific allegations and credible materials to support
the same may have disastrous consequences for the institution
of family, which is built on the premise of love, affection,
cordiality and mutual trust. Institution of family constitutes the
core of human society. Domestic relationships, such as those
between family members, are guided by deeply ingrained
social values and cultural expectations. These relationships
are often viewed as sacred, demanding a higher level of
respect, commitment, and emotional investment compared to
other social or professional associations. For the aforesaid
reason, preservation of family relationship has always been
emphasised upon. Thus, when family relationships are sought
to be brought within the ambit of criminal proceedings
rupturing the family bond, courts should be circumspect and
judicious, and should allow invocation of criminal process
only when there are specific allegations with supporting
materials which clearly constitute criminal offences.
32. We have to keep in mind that in the context of matrimonial
disputes, emotions run high, and as such in the complaints
filed alleging harassment or domestic violence, there may be a
tendency to implicate other members of the family who do not
come to the rescue of the complainant or remain mute
spectators to any alleged incident of harassment, which in our
view cannot by itself constitute a criminal act without there
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12841 of 2020 dt.12-01-2026
11/12
being specific acts attributed to them. Further, when tempers
run high and relationships turn bitter, there is also a propensity
to exaggerate the allegations, which does not necessarily mean
that such domestic disputes should be given the colour of
criminality.
35. We are, thus, of the view that in criminal cases relating to
domestic violence, the complaints and charges should be
specific, as far as possible, as against each and every member
of the family who are accused of such offences and sought to
be prosecuted, as otherwise, it may amount to misuse of the
stringent criminal process by indiscriminately dragging all the
members of the family. There may be situations where some of
the family members or relatives may turn a blind eye to the
violence or harassment perpetrated to the victim, and may not
extend any helping hand to the victim, which does not
necessarily mean that they are also perpetrators of domestic
violence, unless the circumstances clearly indicate their
involvement and instigation. Hence, implicating all such
relatives without making specific allegations and attributing
offending acts to them and proceeding against them without
prima facie evidence that they were complicit and had actively
collaborated with the perpetrators of domestic violence, would
amount to abuse of the process of law.
36. Our observations, however, should not be generalised to
mean that relatives cannot be brought under the purview of the
aforesaid penal provisions when they have actively
participated in inflicting cruelty on the daughter-in-law/victim.
What needs to be assessed is whether such allegations are
genuine with specific criminal role assigned to such members
of the family or whether it is merely a spill over and side-effect
of a matrimonial discord and allegations made by an
emotionally disturbed person. Each and every case of domestic
violence will thus depend on the peculiar facts obtaining in
each case.
39. Under these circumstances, for the reasons discussed
above, we are satisfied that the appellants have been able to
make out a case for interference in these proceedings qua the
present appellants as in our opinion no prima facie case has
been made out against the appellants to continue with the
criminal proceedings against them and allowing these to
continue would amount to abuse of the process of the law."
14. In view of both the factual context of the present
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12841 of 2020 dt.12-01-2026
12/12
case with regard to the complicity of the petitioners who are the
in-laws of the family i.e. relatives of the husband of the
informant as also considering the legal spectrum on the subject
concerned by the Hon'ble Apex Court and for the reasons
discussed above, this Court is of the considered opinion that
continuance of criminal prosecution against the petitioners
would amount to abuse of the process of the law and cause
grave miscarriage of justice, as such, the impugned order dated
19.06.2019
passed by the learned A.C.J.M., Patna City in Agam
Kuan P.S. Case No.476 of 2018 (G.R. No.3404 of 2018) is
hereby quashed.
15. Accordingly, the present application stands
allowed.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date
Transmission Date
