Shah Fahad Alias Kashif Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Heard Mr. A. Allam, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Rahul Kumar, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2.

¶13

This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Bagodar P.S. Case No. 96 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 1210 of 2016, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih.

¶14

I.A. No. 4721 of 2020 has been filed for making amendment in the prayer portion on the ground that during pendency of this petition, learned court has taken cognizance by order dated 31.03.2018.

¶15

The F.I.R. has been lodged alleging there in that having provided dowry to the petitioner, the O.P. No.2 was married with petitioner at Patna on 21.04.2015 as per Muslim rites and custom. After marriage she was demanded Rs. 5 lakhs failing which she was allegedly assaulted and food has not been provided.

¶16

It is further alleged that on 22.06.2015 the O.P. No.2 was severely beaten and she was thrown by pushing from balcony of house and got treatment at Ranchi and then Patna and it was said that if she does not come at matrimonial home she would be

¶17

2

¶18

left out and consequently she was again maltreated and at present she is unable to move. On this basis F.I.R. has been lodged against five persons.

¶19

Mr. A. Allam, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the case is arising out of 498A I.P.C. and unnecessarily the petitioner who is husband of the O.P. No.2 has been implicated in this case. He submits that subsequently fresh enquiry was made on the application of the petitioner and pursuant to direction of the D.I.G, the Superintendent of Police submitted report saying that case against the petitioner is made out however so far relatives including inlaws are concerned, the case is not made out. He submits that due to fall from the chair the O.P. No.2 received injury and the petitioner is taking every care of treatment of O.P. No.2. He submits that the F.I.R. has been lodged belatedly and in view of that the entire criminal proceeding may be quashed.

¶20

The said argument of Mr. A. Allam, learned senior counsel for the petitioner is being resisted by Mr. Rahul Kumar, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 on the ground that there are serious allegations in the F.I.R. and even the Superintendent of Police, Giridih has found the case correct so for the petitioner is concerned and the other inlaws found not to be indulged in such occurrence. He submits that from the e-court portal, he found that even discharge petition has been filed before the learned court which is still pending. On these grounds, he submits that at this stage this Court may not interfere with.

¶21

In view of above submissions of the learned counsel for the parties the Court has gone through the contents of F.I.R. and

¶22

3

¶23

finds that there are serious allegations against the petitioner who is husband of the O.P. No.2. There are direct allegation of assault by the petitioner to the O.P. No.2. There are allegation against the petitioner of pushing the O.P. No. 2 from the balcony pursuant to that the O.P. No.2 suffered fracture of D-2 vertebra and the medical report brought on record by way of counter-affidavit of the O.P. No. 2 supports the said contention of the O.P. No.2 and even the Superintendent of Police has found the case true against the petitioner however the rest of the inlaws were exonerated by the Superintendent of Police, Giridih. There are allegations against the petitioner and even in the fresh enquiry, the case against the petitioner is found to be true.

¶24

In view of above, no case of interference is made out. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. Pending I.A, if any, stands, disposed of.

¶25

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶26

Satyarthi/-

Shah Fahad Alias Kashif v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shah Fahad Alias Kashif v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Minor Megha Sahu Alias Gungun Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Ravinder Kumar Mittal Alias Ravi Mittal Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Sarwan Mittal and Ors. Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Shyam Bihari Agarwal And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Dhananjay Gupta And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Arshida Khatton Alias Arshida Ainum Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.