The High Court quashed the order of cognizance in a criminal complaint alleging harassment regarding the petitioner's sister-in-law, holding the prosecution to be frivolous and motivated by earlier litigations.
Quashed the order of cognizance dated 7.4.2010 passed by the S.D.J.M., Sasaram in Complaint case No.695 of 2006.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.6542 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -695 Year- 2006 Thana -ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSASARAM (ROHTAS)
====================================================== 1. Arvind Singh @ Arvind Kumar Singh @ Rinku S/O Late Dharmadeo Singh, Resident Of Village- Bauri, P.S- Nonahar, District- Gajipur ( Uttar Pradesh)
.... .... Petitioner/s Versus
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. S.M. Rahman, APP For Opposite Party No.2 : None
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER
5 10-11-2014 The Petitioner seeks quashing of the order of cognizance dated 7.4.2010 passed by the S.D.J.M., Sasaram in Complaint case No.695 of 2006 (Trial No.1071 of 2014).
The case of the Complainant is that she was married to the brother of the Petitioner in 1986 but after his death her in-laws ousted her from the matrimonial home. On the date of occurrence the accused persons came to her maternal home and threatened her to withdraw the earlier case and also assaulted her and took her signatures on blank paper.
It has been submitted that the Petitioner is admittedly the brother of the husband of the Complainant and the present case
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6542 of 2014 (5) dt.10-11-2014
2/2
has been filed for reasons of the earlier litigations. The Complainant had filed Complaint case No.335 of 2004, which was quashed by this Court as also Bhailupur Varanasi P.S. case No.34 of 1998 was instituted under Section 498A I.P.C. in which the Petitioner had been acquitted. It is only to further harass the inlaws that the present Complaint was filed with trumped up charges of theft.
Notices had been issued to the Opposite Party No.2 but despite service of notice none appears on her behalf.
Having considered the background facts of the case, the nature of relationship and the allegations, I am inclined to hold that the present prosecution is frivolous in nature and deserves to be set aside.
Hence, the application is allowed and the order of cognizance dated 7.4.2010 passed by the S.D.J.M., Sasaram in Complaint case No.695 of 2006 (Trial No.1071 of 2014) is hereby set aside.
(Anjana Prakash, J)
Narendra/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal prosecution filed by the complainant against the petitioner and his family is frivolous and an attempt at harassment.
Whether the order of cognizance passed by the S.D.J.M., Sasaram in Complaint case No.695 of 2006 deserves to be set aside.
Arvind Singh @ Arvind Kumar Singh @ Rinku
The State Of Bihar
Rita Singh
Anjana Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
