Ratan Kumar Paswan @ Ratan Paswan and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Anjalika Sinha wife of Chandan Kumar, Daughter of Janeshwar Ram, resident of Village- V.I.P. Coloney, Bikramganj, House of Ghanshyam Singh, P.S. Bikramganj, District- Rohtas.

¶14

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶15

=================== Appearance :	===================================
For the Petitioner/s :	Ms. Priya, Advocate, Advocate Ms. Sristi Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s :	Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
For the O.P. No.2 : ===================	Mr. Navendu Prakash, Advocate ===================================

¶16

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT

¶17

Date : 10-11-2025

¶18

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

¶19

The petitioners have preferred application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the order dated 30.05.2018 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judaical Magistrate, Bikramganj, Rohtas passed in G.R. No.286 of 2017 arising out from Bikramganj P.S. Case No.60 of 2017 registered on 07.03.2017 under Sections 323, 504, 498(A) of the Indian Penal

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47231 of 2018 dt.10-11-2025 2/8

¶21

Code and 3/4 of DP Act whereby and where under the learned S.D.J.M., Bikramganj, Rohtas has rejected the petition filed by the petitioners under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C. for discharging him from case.

¶22

The prosecution story in brief is that the informant, Anjalika Sinha, was married to Chandan Kumar, son of Ratan Paswan (petitioner no.1), on 30.05.2015. After marriage, she alleges that her husband and in-laws demanded Rs. 20 lakhs as dowry and, on failure to meet this demand, subjected her to mental and physical harassment, including beatings at Bikramganj and Tripolia Hospital, Patna. On 07.03.2017, her inlaws allegedly came to her residence at Bikramganj V.I.P. Colony, verbally abused and assaulted her, forcibly took ornaments worth Rs. 15 lakhs and cash of Rs. 20,000, and that Chandan Kumar and Akshay Kumar also assaulted her mother, Manjhro Devi, with an iron rod. On these allegations, Bikramganj P.S. Case No. 60 of 2017 was registered on 07.03.2017 under Sections 323, 504, 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the learned District Court before taking cognizance of the offence, has not considered that the

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47231 of 2018 dt.10-11-2025 3/8

¶25

allegation primarily arises out of dispute between husband and wife and is not against the society. He further submitted that the material available on record don’t disclose any criminal element and without considering this aspect, the order taking cognizance against the petitioner cannot sustain in the eye of law. He further submitted that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are fatherin-law and mother-in-law of Opposite party no.2 respectively, petitioner nos. 3 and 4 are unmarried Nanad and petitioner no.5 is cousin Dewar of O.P. No.2.

¶26

Learned counsel 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.

¶27

Per contra , learned counsel for the State submitted that the opposite party no.2 is being harassed by the petitioners and, as such, the present quashing application is fit to be dismissed. He, however, submitted that a chance be given to the parties to settle their dispute amicably.

¶28

In such circumstances, the parties have agreed to appear before the learned District Court at 10.30am on 17.12.2025 to resolve their dispute outside the Court.

¶29

Heard the parties.

¶30

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47231 of 2018 dt.10-11-2025 4/8

¶31

Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties. The parties have mutually agreed to appear on 17.12.2025 before the learned District Court. 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. In such situation, continuation of the proceeding would amount to abuse of process of law leading to vexatious proceeding against the petitioners.

¶32

In this regard, the Apex Court in the case of B.S.

¶33

Joshi v. State of Haryana, reported in, (2003) 4 SCC 675, in paragraph nos. 12 and 13 has held as under:-

¶34

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

¶35

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, 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

¶36

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47231 of 2018 dt.10-11-2025 5/8

¶37

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.

¶38

Recently also, the Apex Court in the case of Mange Ram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Another (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.10817 of 2024) , in paragraph nos. 25, 31 and 32 has reiterated that in cases, particularly, related to dowry, opportunity be given to the parties first to reconcile, which, inter alia, are as follows:-

¶39

“25. This Court, in Dara Lakshmi Narayana vs. State of Telangana, (2025) 3 SCC 735, has made it clear that family members of the husband ought not to be unnecessarily roped into criminal proceedings arising out of matrimonial discord. The Court observed that it has become a recurring tendency to implicate every member of the husband’s family, irrespective of their role or actual involvement, merely because a dispute has arisen between the spouses. It was further held that where the allegations are bereft of specific particulars, and particularly where the relatives sought to be prosecuted are residing separately or have had no connection with the matrimonial home, allowing the prosecution to proceed would amount to an abuse of the process of law. The Court noted that criminal law is not to be deployed as an instrument of harassment, and that judicial scrutiny must be exercised to guard against such misuse.

¶40

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47231 of 2018 dt.10-11-2025 6/8

¶41

31. We also refer to Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 wherein this Court observed that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled, although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored, securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. In this regard, a specific reference was made to offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or a family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim but the offender and the victim have settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable. The High Court may, within the framework of its inherent power, quash the criminal proceeding or criminal complaint or FIR if it is satisfied that on the face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of the offender being convicted and by not quashing the criminal proceedings, justice shall be casualty and ends of justice shall be defeated.

¶42

32. In Naushey Ali vs. State of U.P., (2025) 4 SCC 78, one of us (Viswanathan, J.) observed in paragraph 32 that proceeding with the trial, when the parties have amicably resolved the dispute, would be futile and the ends of justice require that the settlement be given effect to by quashing the proceedings. It would be a grave abuse of process particularly when the dispute is settled and resolved.”

¶43

In the present case, both the parties have agreed to

¶44

settle the dispute outside the Court and they have willingly desired to appear before the learned District Court on 17.12.2025 at 10:30 AM.

¶45

Learned District Court is directed to take necessary steps to refer the matter before the learned Mediator

¶46

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47231 of 2018 dt.10-11-2025 7/8

¶47

of the District Mediation Center.

¶48

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

¶49

In case, the parties resolve their dispute amicably, then the proceeding is required to be dropped in light of the law laid down by the Apex Court as referred hereinabove.

¶50

In case of failure on the part of the petitioners to appear on 17.12.2025 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.

¶51

In case, it is deliberate on the part of the petitioners and they fail to reconcile, then in that case, the learned District Court shall proceed with the trial. In case, it is deliberate on the part of the opposite party no.2 to reconcile, then in that case, the interim protection granted to the petitioners shall continue and the trial shall proceed in accordance with law.

¶52

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47231 of 2018 dt.10-11-2025 8/8

¶53

Accordingly, the present quashing application

¶54

stands disposed of.

¶55

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶56

Ashishsingh/-
AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	18.11.2025
Transmission Date	18.11.2025

Ratan Kumar Paswan @ Ratan Paswan and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ratan Kumar Paswan @ Ratan Paswan and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surya Prakash Vs The State of Bihar

Shanti Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar Gupta Vs The State of Bihar through Vigilance

Ganesh Chandra Jha Vs the State of Bihar

Md Azad Shekh @ Azad Vs The State of Bihar

Arvind Yadav Vs the State of Bihar