Ramanuj Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45188 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2018 Thana- JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Jehanabad

¶3

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

¶4

Ramanuj Sharma S/o- Lt. Kailash Sharma Village- Chaurahi, Ps- Haspura Dist- Aurangabad

¶5

Kamla Devi wife of Ramanuj Sharma Village- Chaurahi Ps- Haspura DistAurangabad

¶6

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Babita Devi wife of Raju Sharma, D/o- Lal Bahadur Shastri R/o- Kamta PsParsi Dist- Arwal

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mayank Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Raj Ballabh Singh For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Pintu Kumar Patel, Advocate. Ms. Neha Kumari Singh, Advocate. Mr. Shivnandan Bharti, Advocate. Mr. Gaurav Kumar Verma, Advocate. ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 09-10-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of

¶14

the petitioners, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

¶15

The present application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the order taking cognizance dated 12.03.2019 passed in Complaint Case No. 61 of 2018 by the learned SDJM, Arwal, whereby learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioners under Sections 323 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45188 of 2024(3) dt.09-10-2025 2/5

¶17

Prohibition Act.

¶18

The allegation is of subjecting the complainant –

¶19

opposite party no.2 to various sorts of torture due to nonfulfillment of the demand of the dowry.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the learned SDJM, Arwal in the most mechanical manner, without applying his judicial mind that the matter is purely civil in nature and without considering the material available on record, has taken cognizance against the petitioners under Sections 323 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act vide order dated 12.03.2019, which cannot sustain in the eye of law. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioners who are fatherin-law and mother-in-law will ensure to diffuse the strained relationship between the parties. He further submitted that marriage is a sacred ceremony but little matrimonial skirmish suddenly erupts into hatred and the parties ponder to reconcile their dispute outside the court. He further submitted that matter be referred for mediation.

¶21

Learned APP and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no.2 jointly submitted that opportunity shall be given to the parties to reconcile their

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45188 of 2024(3) dt.09-10-2025 3/5

¶23

dispute amicably.

¶24

Heard the parties.

¶25

7. Having considered the rival submissions made on

¶26

behalf of the parties, I find that the parties have failed to settle the matrimonial dispute, the Court till last minute must strive to give opportunity to the parties to settle the dispute between the husband and wife amicably. The matrimonial dispute is not an offense against the society rather a matrimonial dispute is a private conflict between spouses and does not inherently constitute an offence against society. However, a false case can have a disastrous consequence in absence of any criminal content. The personal dispute cannot call for a criminal offence. Continuation of the proceeding would amount to abuse of process of law leading to vexatious proceeding against the petitioners.

¶27

In this regard, the Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, reported in, (2003) 4 SCC 675, in

¶28

paragraph nos. 12 and 13 has held as under:-

¶29

“ 12. The special features in such matrimonial matters are evident. It becomes the duty of the court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes.

¶30

13. The observations made by this Court, though in a slightly different context, in G.V. Rao v. L.H.V. Prasad [(2000) 3 SCC 693 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 733] are very apt for determining the approach required to be kept in view in a matrimonial dispute by the courts. It was said that there has been an outburst of matrimonial disputes in recent times. Marriage is a sacred ceremony,

¶31

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45188 of 2024(3) dt.09-10-2025 4/5

¶32

the main purpose of which is to enable the young couple to settle down in life and live peacefully. But little matrimonial skirmishes suddenly erupt which often assume serious proportions resulting in commission of heinous crimes in which elders of the family are also involved with the result that those who could have counselled and brought about rapprochement are rendered helpless on their being arrayed as accused in the criminal case. There are many other reasons which need not be mentioned here for not encouraging matrimonial litigation so that the parties may ponder over their defaults and terminate their disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead of fighting it out in a court of law where it takes years and years to conclude and in that process the parties lose their “young” days in chasing their “cases” in different courts.”

¶33

Both the parties have agreed to appear before the

¶34

learned District Court on 19.11.2025 at 10:30 AM.

¶35

Learned District Court is directed to take necessary steps to refer the matter before the learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center.

¶36

Learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center concerned shall make his/her best efforts to settle the dispute amicably and thereafter submit his/her report before the concerned learned District Court, well within a period of two months, till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners in connection with the aforesaid case.

¶37

In case of failure on the part of the petitioners to appear on 19.11.2025 before the learned District Court or any date fixed by the learned Mediator, the interim protection granted to the petitioners shall automatically lose its force.

¶38

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45188 of 2024(3) dt.09-10-2025 5/5

¶39