Patna High Court - Orders
Arnesh Kumar @ Kr. Arnesh & Ors. vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 1 March, 2013
Author: Kishore Kumar Mandal
Bench: Kishore Kumar Mandal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.849 of 2013
======================================================
1. Arnesh Kumar @ Kr. Arnesh
2. Sri Rameshwar Yadav son of Sri Mukhu Yadav
3. Mrs. Daulti Devi wife of Sri Rameshwar Yadav
4. Ashok Kumar Yadav son of Sri Rameshwar Yadav
5. Amit Yadav son of Satendra Yadav all are residents of 6/IA/IK/30 Road No.1 Near
Water Purification Pump, Laxmi Nagar, Old Shangbi P.S. Shangbi Pune-27
(Maharashtra)
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Sweta Kiran Wife of Amresh Kumar, daughter of Shri Hari Narayan, resident of
C/58 Police Colony P.S. Gardanibagh, Patna
.... .... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR
MANDAL
ORAL ORDER
4 01-03-2013Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.
Petitioners are close in-laws of the opposite party no.2. They are aggrieved by order taking cognizance passed by the learned SDJM, Patna in Complaint Case No. 1581 C of 2012. The order records that upon perusal of the materials brought in course of enquiry, a prima facie case has been made out under section 498A IPC and section 4 of the D.P. Act against the accused(s) named in the complaint. Let it be recorded that the complainant has named five accused persons in the compliant. All of them are petitioners in the present case.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegations are concocted and fabricated. Earlier to this, the complainant had lodged a complaint before the Sangbi police station, Pune whereafter a formal FIR was drawn and the matter was investigated wherein the allegations were not found substantiated. Learned counsel further submits that there is exaggeration in the complaint in order to entrap as many persons of the family of the husband in order to put undue pressure. It is 2 Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.849 of 2013 (4) dt.01-03-2013 2/2 also submitted that the husband is ready and willing to take back the complainant to the matrimonial home and keep her with due respect and dignity.
Counsel for the opposite party no.2, on the other hand, submits that earlier to this a complaint was lodged by the complainant before the Sangbi police station, Pune in which a compromise was entered into between the parties in the light whereof further action was not taken in the said case. He also submits that on going through the complaint it would appear that allegations have been attributed to each of five accused persons named in the complaint as accuseds.
On a consideration of the submissions of the parties, this Court finds that there exists a dispute between both the parties. The complaint filed by the complainant has been supported in course of enquiry by the witnesses. The learned Magistrate in the impugned order has found that from the materials on record collected in course of enquiry a prima facie case has been made out against the petitioners who have been cited in the complaint as accuseds.
This Court does not find any patent illegality in the order impugned. The application is dismissed.
Dismissal of the case shall, however, not preclude the petitioners from raising the issue(s)/point(s), as raised in this application, at the appropriate stage of the proceeding.
(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) HR/-