Dismissed

Yogendra Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC12 Apr 2013CR. MISC./6557/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of an order taking cognizance under Section 498A IPC. The court held allegations of cruelty prima facie make out a case and rejected the submission that no offence is made out, therefore dismissed the petition for quashing.

What did the court decide?

The petition for quashing of the order taking cognizance was dismissed; permission to withdraw was allowed to raise the issue at the stage of framing of charge.

Yogendra Kumar Vs the State of Bihar — Matrimonial and Divorce | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6557 of 2012 (4) dt.12-04-2013

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 6557 of 2012

¶3

====================================================== Yogendra Kumar, Son of Shatrughan Singh Rampuri, Resident of village – Rampur (Kiul), P.S. – Surajgarha, District - Lakhisarai

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Nayan Tara, D/o Dr. Srinath Singh, R/o Prakhand Road, Bara Pareueya, Raxaul, P. S. Raxaul, Dist. East Champaran .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL PRASAD ORAL ORDER Heard.

¶6

4 12-04-2013 Heard.
This is a petition for quashing the order dated
11.12.2011 passed in Raxaul P.S. Case No. 16 of 2008 by
which the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Raxaul
at Motihari took cognizance against the petitioner under
Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and directed to issue
summons against him.
There is allegation that the marriage was solemnized by
false representation that the petitioner has appeared in judicial
service examination as well as exam for selection of APP.
After the marriage, the victim-wife went to Sasural then she
was subjected to physical and mental cruelty. She was not
provided food and was assaulted by accused person.
The police after investigation submitted charge-sheet.
Cognizance was taken on perusal of the case record for the
offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶7

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6557 of 2012 (4) dt.12-04-2013

¶8

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation made, makes out no offence. The allegations are false and fabricated. There is no matrimonial relationship between the parties for nine years and she does not want to live with the petitioner at Lakhisarai.

¶9

However, at the stage of taking cognizance, the Magistrate is required to see whether allegation made, makes out prima facie offence. This Court at this stage neither meticulously examined the statement of the witnesses nor looked into the probable defence. The submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no offence is made out is not sustainable. It has been specifically alleged that she was not given food and was assaulted. Hence, the allegation made prima facie makes out a case and the defence that she is living in Raxaul since nine years is the defence of accused which can only be looked into at the stage of trial.

¶10

However, after some arguments learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the case to raise the issue at the stage of framing of the charge.

¶11

Hence, the case is disposed of.

¶12

(Gopal Prasad, J)

¶13

Kundan/-

Yogendra Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogendra Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pinku Chaudhary @ Sushil Kumar Chaudhary Vs The State Of Bihar

Satrughan Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Ganga Sagar Rai @ Sagar Rai Vs The State Of Bihar

Ranveer Yadav Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Vijay Kumar Sah Vs The State Of Bihar

Krishna Yadav @ Sukhu Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar