Criminal Miscellaneous No. 29157 of 2013. Case: Shailendra Kumar and Ors. Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.. Patna High Court

Case Number:Criminal Miscellaneous No. 29157 of 2013
Party Name:Shailendra Kumar and Ors. Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.
Counsel:For Appellant: Amit Kumar, Advocate and For Respondents: Madan Kumar, APP and Rakesh Ranjan Kumar, Advocate
Judges:Sanjay Priya, J.
Issue:Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 482; Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Section 4; Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Sections 11, 12, 5; Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Sections 201, 302, 34, 364, 494, 498A
Judgement Date:February 02, 2017
Court:Patna High Court
 
FREE EXCERPT

Judgment:

Sanjay Priya, J.

  1. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the order dated 02.04.2009 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nawada, in Complaint Case No. 697 of 2007, by which the learned Magistrate after holding enquiry has found prima facie case against the petitioners for the offence under Section(s) 498-A and 494 Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

  2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2.

  3. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that entire proceeding against these petitioners is bad in law and abuse of the process of Court. Alleged marriage is not admitted by petitioner No. 1. Marriage of petitioner No. 1, and the Opposite Party No. 2, was performed after kidnapping him, which was informed to the police by the petitioner No. 2. Father of the petitioner No. 1 was abducted and killed as he was never found after abduction. Mother of the petitioner No. 1 lodged First Information Report No. 50 of 1995 under Section(s) 364, 302, 201/34 Indian Penal Code in Hisua Police Station. The police after investigation submitted charge-sheet against all the accused persons named in Hisua P.S. Case No. 50 of 1995. The petitioner No. 1 was examined as prosecution witness in that case on 11.10.2002. The petitioners were totally under threat and shifted outside the village and they did not get support either from the police or from the witnesses. Accused persons of Hisua P.S. Case No. 50 of 1995 were finally acquitted by the Additional Sessions Judge, II, Fast Track Court, Nawada, vide Sessions Trial No. 47 of 1999/10 of 2001. The petitioner No. 1 thereafter shifted to Delhi in 1999 and after completion of LLB from Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, in the year 2002, he got himself enrolled with the Bar Council of Delhi, where he is practicing as an Advocate in the Supreme Court of India. The petitioner No. 1 had no concern with the family of the complainant after 1993. The whole allegations are baseless and have been fabricated for the purpose of taking revenge of the criminal case instituted by the mother of petitioner No. 1 against the family members of the complainant. Apart from the fact that the allegations made in complaint are inherently improbable, this is a case of malicious prosecution and the criminal proceedings are fit to be...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL