Urmila Devi Wife of late Mohan Ram vs The State of Bihar

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that during pendency of the present application

petitioner no. 2 has died, and, therefore, an application

being I.A. No. 837/2015 has been filed for

expunging/deleting the name of petitioner no. 2.

Perused the said application. Prayer to

expunge/delete the name of petitioner no. 2 is allowed.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner,

learned counsel for the opposite Party No. 2 as well as

learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The sole petitioner (after deletion of the name

of petitioner no. 2) is mother-in-law of the Opposite Party

No. 2 who has moved this court being aggrieved by order

dated 04.08.2014 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional

Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in Tr. No. 103/2014 arising

out of Laheriasarai P.S. Case No. 83/2000, G.R. No. 912/2000

by which the application preferred on behalf of the

petitioner under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure has been rejected.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

in fact the impugned order has been passed without

application of judicious mind by the learned Magistrate

which would be apparent from a reading of the order itself,

which nowhere indicates the reason for rejection of the

application. Learned counsel submits that although the

impugned order refers only the name of accused Rajesh

Kumar Ram on whose behalf application under Section 239

Cr.P.C. has been mentioned and has been held not maintainable,

but the fact remains that the petitioner was one of the applicants

along with her husband and by the impugned order the

application has been held not maintainable. He would

further submit that the case is still pending at the stage of

framing of charge itself.

Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2

submits that he is not much aware of the present stage of

the proceeding but admittedly Opposite Party No. 2 has got a

decree of divorce vide Matrimonial Suit No. 03/2006 from

the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Darbhanga. A copy

of the decree in the Matrimonial Suit is on the record of the

present case.

This Court has perused the impugned order and

the materials available on the record. The submission of

learned counsel that the impugned order has been passed

without referring even the case of the petitioner pleaded

before the learned Magistrate has got force. The impugned

order is totally unreasoned order not even slightly indicating

the ground for rejection. The order only shows that the

application is not maintainable and hence is fit to be

dismissed.

In the circumstances stated above, this court is

of the opinion that impugned order must be set aside and is

accordingly set aside by this Court. The court below is

directed to consider the application afresh and pass a

reasoned order on the said application.

This application is allowed to the extent

indicated hereinabove.