Kuldeep Mahto, aged about 27 years, son of Mangal Mahto, resident of Village –Nawadih v. 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Manisha Kumari, D/o Shrinath Revidas, Resident of Village

Legal Reasoning

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ….. For the Petitioner For the State : Mr. Sudhansu Kumar Deo, Advocate : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl. P.P. ….. By the Court:-

3. Heard the parties. Though notice has been validly served upon the opposite party no.2, no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party no.2 in-spite of repeated calls. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding of Bermo (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 02 of 2020, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 948 of 2020 and also the order dated 31.07.2021, passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat whereby and where under cognizance has been taken against the petitioner for the offences 2 Cr.M.P. No.4828 of 2022 punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code in a mechanical and cryptic manner.

4. The allegation against the petitioner there was relationship of love going on between the petitioner and the informant for about four years and in the meanwhile, they voluntarily solemnized marriage at a temple on 21.05.2019. After the marriage, when the informant went with the petitioner to his house to live there, the family members of the petitioner abused and assaulted and drove them out. The petitioner dropped the informant in the house of her mother with a promise to take her after some time but he did not come again and the informant came to know that the petitioner was about to solemnize second marriage. On the basis of the First Information Report, police took up investigation of the case and after completion of the investigation, submitted charge sheet against the petitioner for having committed the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. After taking into consideration, the materials in the record, the learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat has taken cognizance of the said offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations against the petitioner are false. The petitioner has not solemnized any marriage with the informant nor there is any proof of the same. It is next submitted that there is no allegation against the petitioner that the petitioner has subjected the informant to any cruelty. It is then submitted that there is no 3 Cr.M.P. No.4828 of 2022 allegation against the petitioner of committing any willful conduct as was likely to drive the informant to commit suicide or cause grave injury or danger to her life, limb or health whether mental or physical nor is there any allegation that the petitioner caused any harm to the informant with a view to coercing her to meet any unlawful demand of her property or valuable security or on account of such failure of the informant or any of her relation to meet the lawful demand. It is next submitted that the only allegation and grievance against the petitioner is that the family members of the petitioner abused and assaulted the informant and drove her out from their house but there is no allegation against the petitioner of having assaulted or abused the informant. It is further submitted that several independent witnesses whose statements have been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. by the police during the investigation of the case namely Taleshwar Mahto, Tolaram Mahto mentioned in para -21 & 22 of the case diary have categorically stated about the petitioner not marrying the informant. It is next submitted that even assuming for the sake of argument that the averments made in the First Information Report and the restatement of the informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. are true in their entirety, still the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is not made out. Hence, it is submitted that the continuation of the criminal proceeding will amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, it is submitted that the entire criminal proceeding of Bermo (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 02 of 2020, corresponding to G.R. 4 Cr.M.P. No.4828 of 2022 Case No. 948 of 2020 and also the order dated 31.07.2021, passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat whereby and where under cognizance has been taken against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code be quashed and set aside.

6. The learned Spl. P.P. submits that the petitioner has not taken back the informant-opposite party no.2 from her house though he promised to take her back after some days and the same amounts to cruelty, therefore, no illegality has been committed by the learned S.D.J.M. in taking the cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. 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 in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that the essential ingredients for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code are:

3. A women was married. She was subjected to cruelty. Such cruelty consisted in any (i) willful conduct which is of such a nature, as is likely to drive the women to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health. (ii) Harassment of the women where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or 5 Cr.M.P. No.4828 of 2022 any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand of any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet the demand. (iii) The women was subjected to such cruelty by her husband or any relative of her husband.

8. Now coming to the facts of the case, there is absolutely no allegation against the petitioner of causing any harassment of the informant with a view to coerce her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security etc. nor there is any allegation of any willful conduct on the part of the petitioner which is of such nature as is likely to drive the informant to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health whether mental or physical of the woman.

9. Under such circumstances, the only allegation that the petitioner did not turned up to take back the informant from the house of her mother, certainly in the absence of any other accusation, in the considered opinion of this Court do not constitute the offence punishable under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the continuation of this criminal proceeding will amount to abuse of process of law and this is a fit case where the entire criminal proceeding of Bermo (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 02 of 2020, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 948 of 2020 and also the order dated 31.07.2021, passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat whereby and where under cognizance has been taken against the petitioner for the 6 Cr.M.P. No.4828 of 2022 offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code be quashed and set aside.

10. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding of Bermo (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 02 of 2020, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 948 of 2020 and also the order dated 31.07.2021, passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat whereby and where under cognizance has been taken against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is quashed and set aside.

Decision

In the result, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed. High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 22nd January, 2024 AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/- (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)