Husband challenged cognizance under Sections 498A, 406, 420, 313 IPC in a case filed by his ex-wife after their mutual divorce decree and payment of alimony. Finding no prima facie Section 498A ingredients, the High Court quashed the Magistrate's cognizance order.
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 REVISION No.1221 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-579 Year-2016 Thana- Muzaffarpur Town District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Rakesh Kumar @ Pappu Son of Sri Dilip Rai @ Dilip Kumar Rai Resident of Village- Rampur Dayal, P.S. Piar, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Ms. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER
5 21-02-2024
From the office report dated 03.01.2024 it appears that notice of the instant proceeding was duly served to opposite party no.2-Purnima Kumari. Inspite of serving notice, the opposite party no.2 failed and neglected to appear before this Court to contest the instant revision.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1221 of 2017(5) dt.21-02-2024 2/4
informant of Town P.S. Case No.579 of 2016, he has been made an accused in the aforesaid case.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1221 of 2017(5) dt.21-02-2024 3/4
in the Civil Court. Moreover, the petitioner allegedly took away the amount of permanent alimony which was paid to the opposite party no.2 at the time of mutual divorce.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1221 of 2017(5) dt.21-02-2024 4/4
order dated 08.09.2017 under Section 498A, 406, 420, 313 of the Indian Penal Code is bad in law and liable to be quashed.
impugned order dated 08.09.2017 is quashed and set aside.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)
mdrashid/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether cognizance taken under Sections 498A, 406, 420, 313 IPC against the petitioner was valid despite a prior decree of mutual divorce and payment of permanent alimony.
Whether obtaining a divorce decree by fraud amounts to cruelty within the meaning of Section 498A IPC.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Rakesh Kumar @ Pappu
The State of Bihar
Purnima Kumari
Bibek Chaudhuri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
