Allowed¶36

Deepak Kumar Jha @Deepak Jha v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC8 Jul 2025CR. MISC./6426/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of cognizance order dated 21.09.2022; Complaint Case No. 532 (C) of 2021, S.D.J.M. Munger; Section 498-A IPC; Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act; dowry demand of Rs. 5 lakhs and golden chain; cruelty and desertion allegations; amicable settlement between parties; mutual consent divorce under Section 13B(1) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; decree dated 18.02.2025; permanent alimony Rs. 3,50,000/- by two Demand Drafts drawn on S.B.I.; abuse of process of court; petition allowed; Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6426 of 2024; Justice Chandra Shekhar Jha; decided 08-07-2025.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the order of cognizance dated 21.09.2022 passed by learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Munger in Complaint Case No. 532 (C) of 2021 qua all petitioners; copy of the judgment to be sent to the learned trial court forthwith.

Deepak Kumar Jha @Deepak Jha Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the petition for quashing the order of cognizance dated 21.09.2022 (Complaint Case No. 532 (C) of 2021; Section 498-A IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act) should be allowed on the ground that, after amicable settlement between the parties and dissolution of marriage by mutual consent with payment of permanent alimony, continuance of the prosecution would amount to abuse of the process of law.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

Since the parties settled their issues amicably, petitioner no. 1/husband paid permanent alimony to O.P. No. 2/wife and the marriage stands dissolved by way of mutual divorce, continuing the present proceeding before the learned trial court would only amount to abuse of the process of court of law.

¶33

Key takeaways

The impugned cognizance order dated 21.09.2022 passed by learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Munger arising out of Complaint Case No. 532 (C) of 2021 is quashed/set aside qua all the above-named petitioners.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No. 6426 of 2024 (oral judgment dated 08-07-2025, Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.): Petitioners (husband employed with the Border Security Force and his parents) sought quashing of the order of cognizance dated 21.09.2022 passed by learned S.D.J.M., Munger in Complaint Case No. 532 (C) of 2021, whereby cognizance was taken under Section 498-A IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Learned counsel submitted that the parties amicably settled their disputes and the marriage between petitioner no. 1 and O.P. No. 2 stood dissolved by judgment and decree dated 18.02.2025 by mutual consent under Section 13B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against permanent alimony of Rs. 3,50,000/-, received by O.P. No. 2 through two Demand Drafts (Rs. 2,50,000/- and Rs. 1,00,000/-) drawn on S.B.I. Holding that continuance of the trial-court proceeding would only amount to abuse of the process of court of law, the Court quashed the cognizance order qua all the petitioners and allowed the quashing petition, directing that a copy of the judgment be sent to the learned trial court forthwith.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6426 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-532 Year-2021 Thana- MUNGER COMPLAINT CASE

¶3

District- Munger

¶4

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

¶5

Deepak Kumar Jha @Deepak Jha SON OF SHIV SHANKAR JHA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MORA GIDHOUR, PS- GIDHOUR, DISTJAMUI, AT PRESENT VILALGE NADI DHAURA , PO AND PSCHIRKUND, DISTT- DHANBAD, JHARKHAND

¶6

SHIV SHANKAR JHA SON OF LATE RAM NARESH JHA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MORA GIDHOUR, PS- GIDHOUR, DIST- JAMUI, AT PRESENT VILALGE NADI DHAURA , PO AND PS- CHIRKUND, DISTT- DHANBAD, JHARKHAND

¶7

GAYATRI DEVI WIFE OF SHIV SHANKAR JHA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MORA GIDHOUR, PS- GIDHOUR, DIST- JAMUI, AT PRESENT VILALGE NADI DHAURA , PO AND PS- CHIRKUND, DISTT- DHANBAD, JHARKHAND

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶12

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brajesh Sahay, Adv : Ms. Harshita, Adv : Mrs. Rupa Sinha, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP

¶13

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

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 08-07-2025

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶16

APP for the State.

¶17

The present application has been preferred by the

¶18

petitioners for quashing the order of cognizance dated 21.09.2022 as passed by learned S.D.J.M. Munger arising out of Complaint Case No. 532 (C) of 2021, whereby cognizance was taken for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioners.

¶19

Upon perusal of record it transpires that notice was

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6426 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025 2/4

¶21

issued against O.P. No. 2 in terms of order dated 01.08.2024, where same appears validly served upon. Despite of same, O.P. No. 2 failed to join the present Court proceedings.

¶22

Supplementary affidavit as provided by learned counsel for the petitioners taken on record, during the course of day itself.

¶23

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that informant solemnized marriage with petitioner no. 1 namely Deepak Kumar Jha on 20.11.2017 according to Hindu rites and rituals, where several articles and cash was gifted by their close relatives and parents as per their capacity. It is further stated that after marriage O.P. No. 2 joined her matrimonial house but soon after six months her in-laws started raising demand of dowry as her husband was employed with Border Security Force (B.S.F) and due to non-fulfillment of demand of cash of Rs. 5 lakhs and golden chain as demanded, she was subjected to cruelty and mental torture. It is also stated that since last two years of filing of complaint petition, Petitioner No. 1/husband is not in touch and as such she was deserted due to non-fulfillment of aforementioned demand of dowry.

¶24

Without exploring other merits as available for the

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6426 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025 3/4

¶26

parties, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that parties amicably settled their disputes and differences and, thereafter, marriage between the parties now stands dissolved under their mutual consent as per provision available under Section 13B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. As per second supplementary affidavit it transpires that marriage between Petitioner No. 1 and O.P. No. 2 dissolved through judgment and decree dated 18.02.2025 against permanent alimony of Rs. 3,50,000/- which was received by O.P. No. 2 through two different Demand Drafts i.e., Rs. 2,50,000/- through Demand Draft No. 857643 dated 22.05.2024 & Rs. 1,00,000/- through Demand Draft No. 857642 dated 22.05.2024 both drawn on S.B.I.

¶27

In view of aforesaid it is submitted by learned

¶28

counsel for petitioner that continuing with the present prosecution would only amount to abuse the process of court of law Petitioner No. 2 & 3 are parents of Petitioner No. 1.

¶29

Learned APP, appeared on behalf of State.

¶30

In view of aforesaid factual submission and also by

¶31

taking note of the fact as parties settled their issues amicably, where petitioner no. 1/husband paid maintenance by way of

¶32

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6426 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025 4/4

¶33

permanent alimony to O.P. No.2/wife as mentioned above, where marriage between the parties stands dissolved by way of mutual divorce, accordingly, continuing with the present proceeding before the learned trial court would only amount to abuse of the process of court of law.

¶34

Accordingly, the impugned cognizance order dated 21.09.2022 as passed by learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Munger arising out of Complaint Case No. 532 (C ) of 2021 qua all above named petitioners is hereby quashed/setaside.

¶35

Accordingly, present quashing petition stands

¶36

allowed.

¶37

Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the learned trial court/concerned court forthwith.

¶38

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)

¶39

S.Tripathi/-

¶40

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	N/A
Uploading Date	09.07.2025
Transmission Date	09.07.2025

Deepak Kumar Jha @Deepak Jha v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Kumar Jha @Deepak Jha v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Padam Kumar Badaliya Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Meen Devi @ Meena Devi @ Mina Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sunny Raj Vs The State Of Bihar