Prabhakar Swami and Anr. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Prabhakar Swami and Anr. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application allowed; cognizance order dated 9.6.2016 of the learned SDJM, Munger in Complaint Case No. 488C of 2015 quashed with regard to the petitioners only, while proceedings against the other co-accused persons continue.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order of cognizance dated 9.6.2016 passed by the learned SDJM, Munger in Complaint Case No. 488C of 2015 is liable to be set aside/quashed against the petitioners. +1 more

Court's answer

The order of cognizance dated 9.6.2016 passed by the learned SDJM, Munger in Complaint Case No. 488C of 2015 is quashed with regard to the petitioners only.

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioners are family members of the complainant's husband and are not directly involved in the demand of dowry, the quashing application was allowed.

Key takeaways

The proceedings with regard to the other co-accused persons shall continue.ratio¶¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.3374 of 2017 (Justice Sandeep Kumar, oral order dated 13-01-2026): Petitioners — Prabhakar Swami, brother-in-law (Bahisur) of the complainant, and his wife Babbli Swami @ Sarita Swami — sought quashing of the order of cognizance dated 9.6.2016 passed by the learned SDJM, Munger in Complaint Case No. 488C of 2015 (PS Case No. 488/2015), arising from allegations that they, with other co-accused, tortured and ousted opposite party no.2 from her matrimonial home over non-fulfillment of dowry. Counsel urged that the allegations against them were general and omnibus. Reliance placed on Preeti Gupta (2010) 7 SCC 667, Kahkashan Kausar (2022) 6 SCC 599 and Achin Gupta (2024 SCC Online SC 759), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court deprecated falsely implicating the husband's relatives in matrimonial disputes. Finding the petitioners to be family members of the complainant's husband and not directly involved in the dowry demand, the Court allowed the application and quashed the cognizance order with regard to the petitioners only; proceedings against the other co-accused persons shall continue.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3374 of 2017

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-488 Year-2015 Thana- MUNGER COMPLAINT CASE District- Munger

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

Prabhakar Swami S/o Puttu Lal Swami.

Babbli Swami @ Sarita Swami, W/o Prabhakar Swami, Both resident of House No. 1 Sarda Nagar, Patan Road, Karmeta, P.S. Maro Taal, P.O. Gumti, District- Jabalpur Madhya Pradesh.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

State Of Bihar

Ratanpriya Swami, W/o Manish Swami, D/o Ajay Kumar Swami, R/o Mohalla- Purab Sarai Phadi, P.S.- Kotwali, P.O District- Munger.

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sri Jharkhandi Upadhyay ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

9 13-01-2026 Heard the parties.

This application has been filed on behalf of the petitioners for setting aside/quashing the order of cognizance dated 9.6.2016 passed in Complaint Case No. 488C of 2015 passed by the learned SDJM, Munger.

As per the prosecution case, the petitioners along with other co-accused persons are said to have tortured and ousted the opposite party no.2 from her matrimonial home over non-fulfillment of dowry.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner no. 1 is the brother-in-law ( Bahisur ) of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3374 of 2017(9) dt.13-01-2026 2/3

complainant and petitioner no. 02 is the wife of petitioner no. 1 and there is general and omnibus allegation against them.

Learned counsel for the petitioners next submits that the learned Magistrate has passed the impugned order of cognizance without application of mind and has taken cognizance against all the accused persons including the petitioners. He further submits that the petitioners have never demanded dowry or assaulted the opposite party no.2 and the allegations made against them are false.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer of the petitioners.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Preeti Gupta & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr reported in (2010) 7 SCC 667 , in the case of Kahkashan Kausar alias Sonam Vs. State of Bihar reported in (2022) 6 SCC 599 and in the case of Achin Gupta Vs. State of Haryana & Anr reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 759 has deprecated the practice of falsely implicating the relatives of the husband in a matrimonial dispute.

Considering the fact that the petitioners are the family members of the husband of the complainant and they are not directly involved in the demand of dowry, this application is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3374 of 2017(9) dt.13-01-2026 3/3

allowed.

Accordingly, the order of cognizance dated 9.6.2016 passed in Complaint Case No. 488C of 2015 by the learned SDJM, Munger, is hereby quashed with regard to the petitioners only.

The proceedings with regard to other co-accused persons shall continue.

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

Vikas/-

U