The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI ---- W.P. (Cr.) No. 789 of 2023 ---- 1.Chaintamayee Bhandary @ Chintamayee Bhanbdari aged about 50 years son of late Nimayi Chandra Pramanik 2.Mayamaye Bhandary @ Mayamayi Bhandari aged about 65 years wife of Pramanik Bhandari 3.Bhagirath Pramanik aged about 35 years son of Pramanik Bhandari All residents of Moti Nagar, Karmik Nagar, C-3, 3rd Floor, Shail Apartment, P.O. ISM, PS -Saraidhela, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand …… …. .... Appellant(s) -- Versus -- 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Nivedita Panja, wife of Sumit Kumar Pramanik, resident of Park Market, Hirapur, Jharnapara, PO and PS Dhanbad, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand .... Respondents ……. …… ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Appellant(s) For the State --- :- :-
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, Advocate Mr. Sanket Khanna, Advocate ---- 7/07.12.2024 Notice upon the respondent no.2 has been effected and by order dated 3.4.2024 as well as 01.5.2024 this matter was adjourned with a view to provide one more opportunity to the respondent no.2 and inspite of that, nobody has appeared today on behalf of the respondent no.2 which clearly suggest that respondent no.2 is not interested in contesting this matter. As such, this matter is being heard in absence of respondent no.2 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State. 3. The prayer has been made in this petition for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No.3689 of 2023 including the order taking cognizance dated 24.7.2023 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad whereby the learned court has been pleased to take cognizance under section 323, 341, 498-A and 379 of the Indian Penal Code as 1 W.P. (Cr.) No. 789 of 2023 well as section 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad. 4. The complaint case has been filed alleging therein that the accused no.1 Sumit Kumar Parmanik came to the house of complainant on 25.12.2021 with other accused persons and give proposal for marriage to the complainant’s father by concealing his first marriage. It is further alleged that after discussion between both the families, date has been fixed for engagement on 5.2.2022 at the house of the accused no.1. The accused no.2 used to visit the house of the complainant and stayed there several times to shake of making strong relationship between the accused no.1 and complainant and demanding sarees and jewellery from the complainant. It is further alleged that accused no.2 along with accused no.1 visited the complainant’s house on 4.4.2022 and the accused no.1 was in drunken state poured vermilion on complainant’s Mang and saying “AB HUMKO KAUN ROKEGA HUM KAR LIYE SHADI”. It is further alleged that thereafter accused no.1 started staying in the complainant’s house at Hirapur and the accused no.2 kept calling and slanging the complainant even went to threaten at her residence. The complainant conceived on 28.3.2021 and she was scared. The accused no.2 after knowing the said fact came to her residence and gave Prasad by mixing Bhang in order to destroy the pregnancy. It is further alleged that the accused no.1 gave consent to the complainant’s father that he will marry soon with the complainant and he wants that she will continue with pregnancy. It is further alleged that the complainant came to know from outer source that the accused no.1 had got married to a workman, namely, Suchitra Rajak, who rejected her restitution of conjugal rights and he is forcing his first 2 W.P. (Cr.) No. 789 of 2023 wife for mutual divorce, otherwise, he will ruin her character in the society and the said fact was even informed by the first wife to the complainant on call. It is alleged that complainant started getting threats from the accused persons when she denied to continue her pregnancy of 3-5 months. It is alleged that complainant was forcefully confined at the residence of the accused no.1 and even her father was also threatened to be killed, if interrupts. It is alleged that complainant was compelled to marry with the accused no.1 without consent of mother and sister of complainant on 4.8.2022 in presence of her father and members at Bhuiphor Mandir. The accused no.2 started torturing the complainant with cruelty by forcing her to do household chores and demanding dowry stating that your father have not given anything at the time of marriage. The accused no.1 every day came to the house in last night in drunken condition and used to beat her by using filthy language. It is further alleged that when the health of the complainant degraded, she came to her maike and got admitted in nursing home. The accused no.1 made her abduct from her maike. In spite of lot of request, he made no FIR and used this incident as sympathy for his transfer to Dhanbad. After release from Alkari Devi Hospital on 28.11.2022 the complainant starting living at her maike along with accused no.1 who started asking for Rs.10 lacs. It is alleged that on 24.12.2022 the accused in night trespassed the house of complainant by jumping over the boundary wall and tried to kill her and her foetus. The complainant was scared and she took the help of PCR who arrested the accused no.1 and took him to Dhanbad police Station and next morning the father of the complainant went to the police station to lodge FIR. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned court has been pleased to take cognizance by order dated 24.7.2023. He submits that prior to filing of the present complaint, the respondent no.2 has lodged the F.I.R being Dhanbad P.S. Case No.32 of 2023 under sections 341, 323, 307, 3 W.P. (Cr.) No. 789 of 2023 498-A, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under section 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The said case was investigated by the police and final form no.228 of 2023 dated 28.05.2023 was submitted whereby the petitioners and others have not been sent up for trial. He submits that in the first case without filing of the protest petition the second complaint has been filed and the allegations are the same except a new cause of action is tried to be made out. He further submits that the petitioner no.1 is mother-in-law aged about 50 years, petitioner no.2 is maternal uncle in law and the petitioner no.3 is wife of the petitioner no.2. He submits that so far as the petitioner nos.2 and 3 are concerned they were residing separately. According to him, there are general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the petitioners. 6 The learned counsel for the respondent State submits that on the complaint case, the learned court has been pleased to take cognizance. 7. In view of the above submission of the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties, the Court has gone through the materials on record including the complaint petition. So far as these petitioners are concerned, there are general and omnibus allegations have been made and if any allegation is there that is against the accused no.1 who is husband namely Sumit Kumar Pramanik and husband is not the petitioner in the present writ petition and further earlier the FIR has been filed which was investigated by the police and final form no.228 of 2023 dated 28.05.2023 was submitted whereby the petitioners and others have not been sent up for trial and in absence of filing of any protest petition, a new case has been lodged and in the present case also there are general and omnibus allegations have been made against the petitioners. The petitioner no.2 is said to be maternal uncle in law and the petitioner no.3 is wife of the petitioner no.2 and residing separately and the petitioner no.1 is mother-in-law. 8. The misuse of section 498-A IPC was considered in several 4 W.P. (Cr.) No. 789 of 2023 judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Cout as well as by the High Courts. In the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 at paragraph no.4 it has been held as under: “4. There is a phenomenal increase in matrimonial disputes in recent years. The institution of marriage is greatly revered in this country. Section 498-A IPC was introduced with avowed object to combat the menace of harassment to a woman at the hands of her husband and his relatives. The fact that Section 498-A IPC is a cognizable and non-bailable offence has lent it a dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that are used as weapons rather than shield by disgruntled wives. The simplest way to harass is to get the husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In a quite number of cases, bedridden grandfathers and grandmothers of the husbands, their sisters living abroad for decades are arrested. “Crime in India 2012 Statistics” published by the National Crime Records Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs shows arrest of 1,97,762 persons all over India during the year 2012 for the offence under Section 498-A IPC, 9.4% more than the year 2011. Nearly a quarter of those arrested under this provision in 2012 were women i.e. 47,951 which depicts that mothers and sisters of the husbands were liberally included in their arrest net. Its share is 6% out of the total persons arrested under the crimes committed under the Penal Code. It accounts for 4.5% of total crimes committed under different sections of the Penal Code, more than any other crimes excepting theft and hurt. The rate of charge-sheeting in cases under Section 498-A IPC is as high as 93.6%, while the conviction rate is only 15%, which is lowest across all heads. As many as 3,72,706 cases are pending trial of which on current estimate, nearly 3,17,000 are likely to result in acquittal.” 9. The matters are being filed at the heat of moment in matrimonial disputes and that was the subject matter in the case of Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand reported in (2010) 7 SCC 667. In the case of G.B.Rao v. L.H.B. Prasad and Others reported in (2000) 3 SCC 693 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that if general and omnibus allegations are there and all the family members were roped in the matrimonial litigation, the Court can quash the proceeding, unless any case is made out. In the case of K. Subba Rao v. State of Telangana reported in (2018) 14 SCC 452, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that the Court should be careful in 5 W.P. (Cr.) No. 789 of 2023 proceeding against the distant relatives in the crime pertaining to matrimonial disputes and dowry death. The relatives of husband should not be roped on the basis of omnibus allegations, unless specific instances in the crime are made out. 10. The above are some of the judgments which clearly demonstrate that how misuse of section 498-A of the IPC are being made. 11. Coming to the facts of the present case, on perusal of the contents of the complaint which was second complaint it is found that general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the petitioners. There is no specific allegation made against these petitioners and no specific role has been attributed to any of the petitioners in furtherance of general allegations which have been made against them which simply leads to a situation wherein one fails to ascertain the role played by each accused in the alleged offence. 12. Furthermore, regarding similar allegation of harassment, one FIR was registered which was investigated by the police and final form was submitted and the petitioners have not been sent up for trial. 13. If the separate transactions are said to be there, different case can be registered, however, if the transaction is similar, the second case is mis- use of process of law and further the husband is not the petitioner in the present petition. 14. In view of above facts, reasons and analysis, entire criminal proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No.3689 of 2023, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad are hereby quashed so far as these petitioners are concerned. 15. 16.
Decision
W.P. (Cr.) No. 789 of 2023 is allowed and disposed of. Pending petition if any also stands disposed of accordingly. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) SI/ A.F.R. 6 W.P. (Cr.) No. 789 of 2023