Partly allowed

Shyam Narayan Yadav v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Jharkhand HC14 Dec 2023Cr.M.P./214/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand allowed the petitioner's plea to quash criminal proceedings initiated in a matrimonial dispute. The bench quashed the proceedings solely against the petitioner, noting no specific allegations were made against him, while preserving the case against remaining accused members.

What did the court decide?

The criminal proceedings, including the order taking cognizance dated 21.09.2015, are quashed so far as the petitioner is concerned.

Shyam Narayan Yadav Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr. — Domestic Violence | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

Cr.M.P. No. 214 of 2016

¶4

Shyam Narayan Yadav …… Petitioner Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand & Anr. …… Opp. Parties

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶7

---------

¶8

For the Petitioner : Mr. Santosh Kumar Soni, Advocate For the State : Mr. Achinto Sen, A.P.P.

¶9

04/Dated: 14/12/2023

¶10

It appears that vakalatnama has already been filed on behalf of O.P. No.2 however, on repeated calls nobody responded on behalf of the O.P. No.2. Accordingly, this matter is being heard in absence of O.P. No.2.

¶11

Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Achinto Sen, learned counsel for the State.

¶12

This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including order taking cognizance dated 21.09.2015 passed in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 150/2014, corresponding to G.R. No. 1534 of 2014, pending in the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ramgarh.

¶13

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are nine accused persons however, the petitioner has only filed this petition.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is father of Deepak Kumar who is alleged to be husband of daughter of the O.P. No.2. He submits that the father of Neha Kumari lodged the case against entire family members of the petitioners. He submits that allegations are made that there was threatening that indecent picture of Neha Kumari will be uploaded on the internet. He submits that entire family members of the petitioner has been roped in this case. He submits that there is no specific allegation against

¶15

¶16

the petitioner who happens to be father of Deepak Kumar. He submits that Deepak Kumar and Neha Kumari were in relationship and they have already married and to buttress this argument he refers to Annexure-3 which is Marriage Certificate. He submits that the said marriage has taken place in the year, 2012 and the F.I.R. has bene lodged in the year, 2014. He submits that apart from that there is nothing against the petitioner.

¶17

Learned counsel for the State submits that it appears that there are general and omnibus allegation made in para 12 of the complaint petition. 7. In view of Annexure-3 it is an admitted fact that Deepak Kumar and Neha Kumari were married on 26.03.2012. This document has been issued by the District Sub-Registrar, Ranchi and the present case has been filed in the year, 2014. In para 12 of the complaint petition there is general and omnibus allegation against the entire family members of the petitioner. It appears that only to pressurize the family members the present case has been filed. Further, only father of Deepak Kumar is petitioner before this Court and rest of the accused persons have not filed quashing petition.

¶18

In view of above, the entire criminal proceeding including order taking cognizance dated 21.09.2015 passed in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 150/2014, corresponding to G.R. No. 1534 of 2014, pending in the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ramgarh, so far this petitioner is concerned, are quashed.

¶19

This petition stands allowed and disposed of. Pending I.A, if any, stands disposed of. Interim order is vacated.

¶20

It is made clear that this Court has not interfered with cognizance order and entire proceeding so far rest of the accused perrons are concerned. The learned court shall proceed in accordance with law.

¶21

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶22

Satyarthi/

Shyam Narayan Yadav v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyam Narayan Yadav v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md Taj Mian And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Girinder Singh Alias Garinder Singh Alias Jitender Singh Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Sultana Alias Afsana Begum Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Sanjay Kumar And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Ishaque Mian Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Nawlesh Kumar Alias Navlesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through Anti Corruption Bureau Hazaribag