Pankaj Narayan vs State Of Jharkhand

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J

Heard the parties.

This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023  with the prayer to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceeding of C.P. Case No. 5803 of 2023, including  the  order  dated  07.02.2024,  passed  by  the  learned  Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad, by which the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad has found prima facie case  for the offence  punishable under  Section 498A of  the Indian Penal  Code and  under  Section  3/4 of  the  Dowry  Prohibition  Act against the petitioners.

The allegation against the petitioners is that after the marriage of the complainant with the petitioner no.1, both the petitioners made  a  dowry  demand  of  Rs.10,00,000/-  to  be  brought  from  her father. The complainant informed her parents about the dowry demand. The parents of the complainant tried to make the petitioners understand their difficulty in meeting their dowry demand but the petitioners remained adamant for payment of the additional dowry and with a view to coerce the informant to meet the  said  unlawful  dowry  demand  of  Rs.10,00,000/-  harassed  her by abusing with filthy language and assaulted her and as a means of harassment, the complainant was also tortured both physically and mentally for which she had to take treatment from doctor. Thereafter, the complainant came to her paternal house but on 19.03.2023,  the  petitioners  also  came  to  the  paternal  house  of  the complainant  at  Katras  and  also  made  the  dowry  demand  and  as means  of  harassing  her  to  coerce  the  complainant,  the  petitioner no.1 behaved with the complainant in obscene manner. Again on 02.04.2023, both the petitioners came to Katras and again made the said unlawful dowry demand of Rs.10,00,000/- and threatened that unless the said dowry demand is met, the petitioner no.1 will solemnize a second marriage. On the basis of the complaint, statement of the complainant under solemn affirmation and statement of the inquiry witnesses, the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad has found prima facie case for the offences as already indicated above.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the opposite party no.2 came to her matrimonial house leaving all her jewelleries at Asansol which were gifted to her during her wedding at Dhanbad. She was never inclined to participate in any household  works  at  her  matrimonial  house.  It  is  next  submitted that the petitioner no.2 is suffering from different ailments and is not in a condition to walk properly at present. It is next submitted that the petitioner no.1 filed MCA No. 6968 of 2023 in the Family Court, Bangalore for dissolving the marriage amicably. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vide order dated 07.01.2025 allowed the Transfer Petition of the M.C.A. Case No,.6968 of 2023 from Bangaluru to the Family Court, Dhanbad. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegations against the petitioners are false and the petitioners never visited paternal house of the complainant on 02.04.2023.

Relying upon the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Dara Lakshmi Narayana and Others Vs. State of Telangana and Another, reported in (2024) SCC Online SC 3682, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in the said Judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has reiterated  the  settled  principle  of  law  that  mere reference  to  the names  of  the  family  members  in  a criminal  case  arising  out  of  a matrimonial dispute without specific reasons indicating their active involvement should be nipped in the bud.

The learned counsel for the petitioners next relies upon the Judgment  of  the  Hon’ble  Supreme  Court  of  India  in the  case  of Geddam Jhansi Vs. State of Telangana and Another, reported in (2025)  SCC  Online  SC  263  and  submits  that  therein  the  Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the facts of that case, when there was a police case and there was a complaint case and the inquiry witnesses in the complaint case did not bring any new facts, in the facts  of  that  case,  the  Hon’ble  Supreme  Court  of  India  held  that continuation of the criminal proceeding against the other relatives except the husband and mother of the husband was unnecessary and quashed the same. Hence, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the prayer as prayed for by the petitioners be allowed.

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  petitioners  and  submits  that  there  is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of both demanding dowry of Rs.10,00,000/- and treating the informant with cruelty by harassing her in several modes and manner with a view to coerce her to meet the unlawful demand of dowry of Rs.10,00,000/- to be brought by her from her parents and the learned Judicial Magistrate has not issued summoning orders against the other family members keeping in view the principle of law settled by the Judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Hence, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition being withoutany merit be dismissed.

Having  heard  the  submissions  made  at  the  Bar  and  after  going through the materials available in the record, this Court finds that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of demanding  the  dowry  of  Rs.10,00,000/-  on  two  specific  dates  of 19.03.2023 and 02.04.2023 at the paternal house of the complainant at Katras. There are also direct and specific allegations against the petitioners of harassing the complainant with a view to coerce her to meet the unlawfuldemand of dowryof Rs.10,00,000/-.

Under such circumstances, this Court is  of the considered view that  the  materials  in  the  record  are  sufficient  for  the  learned  Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad to find prima facie case under  Section  498A  of  the  Indian  Penal  Code  and  under  Section 3/4 of the DowryProhibition Act being made out.

Therefore, this Court do not find any justifiable reason to accede to the prayer of the petitioners made in this criminal miscellaneous  petition  in  exercise  of  its  power  under  Section  528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023.

Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed.