Dismissed

Poonam Ranjan and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC3 Apr 2014CR. MISC./11003/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR alleged to be maliciously instituted under Section 498A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act due to matrimonial incompatibility. Despite a claim of amicable settlement, the court held the FIR constituted a cognizable offence and could not be quashed at the investigation stage.

What did the court decide?

Application for quashing of FIR dismissed; matter to be brought to notice of investigating agency if settlement occurred.

Poonam Ranjan and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.11003 of 2013

¶2

====================================================== 1. Poonam Ranjan wife of Manoj Ranjan 2. Manoj Ranjan son of Sri Kedar Paswan Both are resident of Mohalla- A.G. Colony, Main Road, Near S.S. Complex, P.S.- Shastri Nagar, District- Patna 3. Jai Mangal Paswan son of Late Kuar Paswan @ Kunwar Paswan 4. Kanti Devi wofe of Jai Mangal Paswan 5. Santosh Kumar Rakesh son of Jai Mangal Paswan 6. Pankaj Kumar son of Jai Mangal Paswan 7. Priyanka @ Priyanka Kumari daughter of Jai Mangal Paswan 8. Deepak Kumar son of Jai Mangal Paswan All resident of Tilak Marg, House No.-26, P.S.- S.K. Puri, DistrictPatna

¶3

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Bihar 2. Smriti daughter of Narendra Paswan, Resident of Village- Sewai, P.S.Kadirganj, District- Patna, presently residing at New Patliputra Colony, Road No.-1, House No.-48, P.S.- Patliputra, District- Patna

¶6

.... .... Opposite Party/s

¶7

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶8

2 03-04-2014 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite party.

¶9

The petitioners seek quashing of the FIR relating to Sri Krishnapuri P.S. Case No.176 of 2012 registered for the offence punishable under section 498A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code as also section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. It has been contended that the allegations made in the FIR are not true and due to incompatibility in matrimonial relationship, the instant case has maliciously been instituted.

¶10

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11003 of 2013 (2) dt.03-04-2014

¶11

¶12

Learned counsel has further contended that the parties have amicably settled their dispute out side the court.

¶13

Be that as it may, the allegations made in the FIR do constitute a cognizable offence. In that view of the matter, the FIR can not be quashed. The case is at the stage of investigation. If the parties have settled their dispute outside the court, the matter may be brought to the notice of the investigating agency at the stage of investigation for appropriate action.

¶14

For the reasons assigned hereinabove, the application is dismissed. However, it is made clear that I have not expressed any opinion regarding bona fide of allegation made in the FIR.

¶15

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

¶16

Md.S./-

Poonam Ranjan and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Poonam Ranjan and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

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

Ram Nath Bhagat and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Ashok Das and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Daya Shankar Tiwary Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Naushad Idrisi @ Md. Naushad Ali and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Hardeo Ram and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Yogendra Mandal and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.