The Patna High Court allowed discharge for junior family members in a domestic violence case due to general allegations, while dismissing petition seeking discharge for the alleged second wife who faced direct specific accusations.
Discharge allowed for petitioners No. 4 to 11; discharge petition dismissed for Juhi Kumari.
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.22103 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2018 Thana- JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Jehanabad
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 26017 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2018 Thana- JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Jehanabad
======================================================
JUHI KUMARI W/O ARVIND KUMAR @ ARVIND SHARMA, D/O SRI GOPAL KUMAR @ GOPAL SHARMA RESIDENT OF VILLAGEBELLA, PS- NAUBATPUR, DISTT- PATNA
... ... Petitioner/s
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22103 of 2023(10) dt.15-07-2024 2/6
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 22103 of 2023) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Prabhat Ranjan Mr. Ansh Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh : Mr.Renu Kumari Mr. Pramod Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER
10 15-07-2024
Cr. Misc. No. 22103 of 2023
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22103 of 2023(10) dt.15-07-2024 3/6
Magistrate, Jehanabad in connection with 58(C)/2018 by which the discharge application of the petitioners has been rejected.
i. On 16.07.2010, the complainant was married to Arbind Kumar (Petitioner no. 1) as per the Hindu rites and rituals. It has been alleged in the compliant that after the solemnization of marriage, the complainant shifted to her matrimonial home, where she was continuously forced for fulfilling the demand of Rs. 2,00,000/-.
ii. Aggrieved by the behavior of the husband side, the father of the complainant gave an amount of Rs, 50,000/- in the year 2014.
iii. It has been further alleged that after receiving the amount of Rs. 50,000/- the behavior of husband side improved, but soon after February, 2015 the husband side again started to demand an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- from the complainant and threatened for solemnizing the second marriage of Petitioner no. 1.
iv. It has been further alleged in the complaint that the husband of the complainant (Petitioner no.1) thereafter married
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22103 of 2023(10) dt.15-07-2024 4/6
another women namely Juhi Kumari.
v. It has been further alleged that on receiving the information of second marriage, the family members of the complainant arrived at the house of the Petitioner no. 1, after which the matter was aggravated and the complainant was forced to leave her matrimonial home.
vi. Furthermore, it has been alleged that the jewellery and other personal belongings of the complainant worth Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees 5 lacs.) was forcefully taken away from her, and her family members were beaten by the side of the Petitioner.
vii. On the basis of the aforesaid Complaint, a complaint case bearing Complaint case no. 58 of 2018 was registered with the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad under Section 323, 498 A, and 494 of the IPC.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22103 of 2023(10) dt.15-07-2024 5/6
complainant has filed the case making all the family members as accused.
Cr. Misc. No. 26017 of 2023
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22103 of 2023(10) dt.15-07-2024 6/6
quashing the order dated 20.01.2023 passed in Complainant Case No. 58(C)/2018 (Trial No. 1318 of 2022) passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad by which the application filed by the petitioner who is alleged to be the second wife of the main accused Arbind Kumar @ Arbind Sharma for discharge under Section 245 of the Cr. P.C. has been rejected.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Saif/-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether discharge for petitioners No. 4 to 11 can be allowed based on general and omnibus allegations without specific incrimination.
Whether the order rejecting discharge for the petitioner alleged to be the second wife of the accused should be interfered with on account of direct allegations.
Whether sister-in-law and other junior family members should be prosecuted in a matrimonial dispute under Section 498A IPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Preeti Gupta V. State of JharkhandReferred¶57
Preeti Gupta V. State of Jharkhand [(2010) 7 SCC 667] · Who else cites this
Kahkashan Kausar Vs. State of BiharReferred¶57
Kahkashan Kausar Vs. State of Bihar [(2022) 6 SCC 599] · Who else cites this
Achin Gupta Vs. State of HaryanaReferred¶57
Achin Gupta Vs. State of Haryana [2024 INSC 369] · Who else cites this
Arbind Kumar
Suresh Singh
Chandrawati Devi
Anand Kumar
Sangita Devi
Juhi Kumari
Sandeep Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
