Allowed

Lagan Ram and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC11 Dec 2017CR. MISC./40716/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed petitioners to quash cognizance order under 498A IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, quashing entire criminal proceedings due to lack of specific overt acts of demand or torture attributed to them despite a marital dispute and subsequent compromise.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the cognizance order dated 17.09.2010 passed in Complaint Case No.1578 of 2010 pending in S.D.J.M., Vaishali, including summons to stand trial.

Lagan Ram and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.40716 of 2013

¶3

Arising out of PS.Case No. -1578 Year- 2010 Thana -VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictVAISHALI (HAJIPUR)

¶4

===========================================================

¶5

Lagan Ram, Son of Late Baja Ram, Resident of Village Gaushpur, P.S. Rajapakar, District Vaishali

¶6

Samundri Devi, Wife of Lagan Ram, Resident of Village Gaushpur, P.S. Rajapakar, District Vaishali

¶7

Naresh Ram, Son of Lagan Ram, Resident of Village Gaushpur, P.S. Rajapakar, District Vaishali

¶8

Babita Devi, Wife of Naresh Ram, Resident of Village Gaushpur, P.S. Rajapakar, District Vaishali

¶9

Basudeo @ Basu Ram, Son of Kailash Ram, Resident of Village Gaushpur, P.S. Rajapakar, District Vaishali

¶10

Urmila Devi, Wife of Babu Ram, Resident of Village Gaushpur, P.S. Rajapakar, District Vaishali .... .... Petitioners

¶11

Versus

¶12

The State of Bihar

¶13

Lalita Devi, Wife of Bhola Ram, Resident of Shumai Mishra Tola, P.S. Sadar Hajipur, District Vaishali, at present Lalita Devi, D/o Dinesh Ram, Resident of Fulwaria, Thana Mahua, District Vaishali

¶14

		.... .... Opposite Parties
====================	=====	==================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners	:	Mrs. Rina Sinha, Advocate
For the State For O.P. No.2 ====================	: : =====	Mr. Ajay Kumar-I, APP Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur, Advocate ==================================
CORAM: HONOURABL ORAL JUDGMENT	E MR.	JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR

¶15

Date: 11-12-2017

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶17

The petitioners seek quashing of the cognizance order dated 17.09.2010, passed by learned S.D.J.M., Vaishali at Hajipur in Complaint Case No.1578 of 2010 thereby taking cognizance of the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and issuing summons to stand trial in the case.

¶18

The brief fact giving rise to the case is that on

¶19

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40716 of 2013 dt.11-12-2017

¶20

2 /3

¶21

14.05.2007, the complainant’s marriage was solemnized with Bhola Ram and thereafter her husband along with all his family members used to torture her for realizing further demand of Rs.1,00,000/-, colour TV and motorcycle. Several times they kicked her out of the matrimonial home, ultimately on 31.05.2010 after abusing and assaulting her and keeping all her jewelleries pushed out of the husband’s home.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegations are only general and omnibus, no specific overt act is alleged against the petitioners who are father-in-law, mother-in-law, brother of the complainant’s husband, his wife, married Nanad and her husband. Moreover, the complainant after filing compromise is living with her husband.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2 also admits the fact of compromise and the complainant living together with her husband.

¶24

Having considered the submissions of both sides and on perusal of the records, the Court finds that except casual reference of petitioners’ names finding place in the complaint, no specific allegation of any act of demand of dowry or torture in that connection is imputed against any one of the petitioners. Unless specific overt act of making demand of dowry and committing any harassment in that

¶25

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40716 of 2013 dt.11-12-2017

¶26

3 /3

¶27

connection or committing cruelty of such a nature likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or causing grave injury to life, limb or health is attributed; no prima facie offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is attracted, so the entire criminal proceeding inclusive of the cognizance order dated 17.09.2010, passed in Complaint Case No.1578 of 2010, pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Vaishali at Hajipur is hereby quashed with respect to the petitioners.

¶28

The quashing application stands allowed.

¶29

(Arun Kumar, J.)

¶30

S.Kumar/-

¶31

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
UploadingDate	15.12.2017
Transmission Date	15.12.2017

Lagan Ram and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lagan Ram and Ors. 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

Ramawadhesh Prasad Kushwaha Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Raj Kumar Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Rana Rakesh Singh Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Anil Kumar Singh and Anr. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Pankaj Yadav @ Pankaj Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Dr. Bhushan Prasad Nayak and Anr. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.