Amarjeet Kumar @ Alok Kumar, aged about 32 years, Son of Lal Krishna Prasad v. 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Anuradha Devi @ Anuradha Kumari, aged about 28
Case Details
( 2025:JHHC:37840 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 4047 of 2022 Amarjeet Kumar @ Alok Kumar, aged about 32 years, Son of Lal Krishna Prasad, resident of village –Saindih, P.O. Pyarepur, P.S. – Griyak, District –Nalanda, Jharkhand. .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Anuradha Devi @ Anuradha Kumari, aged about 28 years, W/o Amarjeet Kumar @ Alok Kumar, Resident of Gwala Bastee, Road No. 17, P.O.+P.S. –Adityapur, District –Seraikella –Kharsawan (Jharkhand). Opp. Parties …. P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ….. For the Petitioner For the State For the O.P. No.2
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Jitendra Tripathi, Advocate : Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P. : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate ….. By the Court:- 1. 2. Heard the parties. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer to quash the order dated 25.08.2022, passed in Adityapur P.S. Case No. 144 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 556 of 2017 and all subsequent proceedings thereto passed in Adityapur P.S. Case No. 144 of 2017 against the petitioner for having committed the offences punishable under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 1 Cr.M.P. No.4047 of 2022 ( 2025:JHHC:37840 ) 3. This is the second journey of the petitioner to this Court in connection with the same case. Earlier, the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offences on the basis of the police report vide order dated 25.01.2018. The same was challenged by the
Decision
petitioner by filing Cr.M.P. No. 415 of 2019 which was disposed of vide order dated 22.06.2022. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court after looking into the earlier cognizance order dated 25.01.2018 observed that the court below has not disclosed the prima facie materials, so far as the petitioners are concerned and took cognizance under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, hence the Co- ordinate Bench remanded the matter to the court below to pass a fresh order in accordance with law. In terms of the order dated 22.06.2022, passed in Cr.M.P. No. 415 of 2019, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella found sufficient materials to proceed against the petitioner for having committed the offences punishable under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 4. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is that the petitioner being the husband of the informant about six months after the marriage demanded Rs.1,00,000/- for purchasing a vehicle as dowry and Rs.2,00,000/- to pay bribe for his getting a service. The mother of the informant paid Rs.1,00,000/- but could not pay the amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. Thereafter, the informant was harassed by the petitioner and his family members to meet 2 Cr.M.P. No.4047 of 2022 ( 2025:JHHC:37840 ) his unlawful demand of dowry by perpetrating physical and mental cruelty to her. They went to the extent of attempting to kill the informant by pouring kerosene oil upon her and tried to set fire to her but as the informant raised hue and cry, and only after that they left her. They inflicted injury on the right hand of the informant, the marks of which was visible even on the date of filing of the F.I.R. The petitioner thereafter established illicit relationship with a married lady and used to invite her to the matrimonial house of the informant. When the informant protested the illicit relationship between the petitioner with his paramour, the petitioner and the said lady together assaulted the informant severely besides abusing her and drove the informant out from the house. The informant was harassed and illtreated daily and her mobile phone was snatched away so that she could not contact her paternal family members. The informant was kept locked in a room in the house so that she cannot meet anybody. On 12.04.2017 all the valuables of the informant were forcible taken away and was hidden and thereafter the informant was driven out from her matrimonial house and she was threatened that she will be killed if she again comes to her matrimonial house. On the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, police registered Adityapur P.S. Case No. 144 of 2017 and took up investigation of the case and after completion of the investigation of the case, police submitted charge sheet against the 3 Cr.M.P. No.4047 of 2022 ( 2025:JHHC:37840 ) petitioner and cognizance of the offence is taken as already indicated above. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is false. The learned trial court has taken cognizance against the petitioner and others on 25.08.2022 ignoring the direction of this Court. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed for by the petitioner in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer as prayed for by the petitioner in this criminal miscellaneous petition and submits that nowhere in the order dated 22.06.2022, in Cr.M.P. No. 415 of 2019, has it been said by the High Court that cognizance is not to be taken against the petitioner. It is next submitted that rather though all the grounds which were raised by the petitioner in this criminal miscellaneous petition were raised on the earlier occasion and prayer was made to quash the entire criminal proceeding, but the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court did not quash the entire criminal proceeding as there were sufficient materials against the petitioner to constitute the offences but as the order issuing summons was not dealing with the materials in the record in details, hence it was remitted only for that limited purpose. It is next submitted that as per the direction of this Court in Cr.M.P. No. 415 of 2019 along with Cr.M.P. No. 97 of 2018, the learned Judicial Magistrate 4 Cr.M.P. No.4047 of 2022 ( 2025:JHHC:37840 ) having taken cognizance of the offence. Hence, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed. 7. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials available in the record, this Court finds that though in Cr.M.P. No. 415 of 2019 along with Cr.M.P. No. 97 of 2018, prayer was made by the petitioner to quash the entire criminal proceeding, on the ground that the materials in the record is insufficient to proceed with the prosecution but the same did not find favour with the Co-ordinate Bench and the Co- ordinate Bench vide order dated 22.06.2022 in the said Cr.M.P. No. 415 of 2019 along with Cr.M.P. No. 97 of 2018 did not quash the entire criminal proceeding rather as the cognizance order was not disclosing prima facie materials so far as the petitioners are concerned, hence the matter was remitted to the court concerned to pass a fresh order in accordance with law. It is then submitted that the said order dated 22.06.2022 passed in Cr.M.P. No. 415 of 2019 along with Cr.M.P. No. 97 of 2018 having not been challenged, the same has attained finality. In the impugned order dated 25.08.2022, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella has taken cognizance after discussing the prima facie materials available against the petitioner and has found sufficient material to proceed against the petitioner for having committed the offences punishable under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 5 Cr.M.P. No.4047 of 2022 ( 2025:JHHC:37840 ) 8. Therefore, this Court do not find any illegality in the same and the same is in accordance with the direction passed by this Court in Cr.M.P. No. 415 of 2019 along with Cr.M.P. No. 97 of 2018. 9. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that there is no justifiable reason to interfere with the order dated 25.08.2022, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella in Adityapur P.S. Case No. 144 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 556 of 2017 in exercise of the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 10. Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit is dismissed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 3rd December, 2025 AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/- Uploaded on 18/12/2025 6 Cr.M.P. No.4047 of 2022