Usha Devi 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 482 of Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the order dated 26.05.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi in connection with C.P. Case No. 114 of 2022 whereby and where under, the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi has issued summons after finding prima facie case for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 420 and 506 of Indian Penal Code.

The brief fact of the case is that the petitioner no.1 is the mother-in-law, petitioner no.2 is the father-in-law and the petitioner no.3 is the sister-in-law (Nanad) of the complainant. The allegation against the petitioners in the complaint is that the son of the petitioner nos.1 and 2 has cheated the complainant by dishonestly inducing her to believe that he is in deep love with her and after so deceiving, made her marry him only to tell her later on, that he has married her for taking revenge only and demanded dowry of Rs.10,00,000/- to be brought by the complainant and when the complainant failed to meet the dowry demand, the petitioners harassed the complainant with a view to coerce her and her parents to meet the unlawful demand of Rs.10,00,000/- . The harassment was made by beating the complainant black and blue regularly starting from the date of marriage i.e. on 08.02.2020 to till she was thrown out from her matrimonial house.

Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Keshav Kumbhakar @ Keshav vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr. reported in 2024 (1) JLJR 139 wherein, in the facts of that case, this Court relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in (2022) 6 SCC 599 and considering the facts of the case, where there were no specific allegations against the petitioner of that case for having committed any particular act on any particular occasion and as the allegations were general and omnibus in nature, this Court quashed the entire criminal proceeding against the petitioners of that case and submits that like that case, in this case also, in the absence of any specific allegation against the petitioners the entire criminal proceeding be quashed against them.

Learned counsel for the petitioners next relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Sunita Gupta vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr. reported in 2024 (4) JBCJ 131 [HC] wherein, this Court in the facts of that case, relied upon the said earlier judgment as well as the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India as mentioned in the foregoing paragraphs of this judgement and in the facts of that case, where there was no time, date, place or manner of cruelty was mentioned, quashed the entire criminal proceeding against the petitioner of that case and submits that in this case also there is no specific date and time hence, the prayer as made in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of demanding dowry of Rs.10,00,000/-, which is sufficient to constitute the offence punishable under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. It is next submitted that though the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi has not found prima facie for the offence punishable under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act but certainly, there is scope of framing of charge for the said offence at the relevant time and in view of specific allegation against the petitioners of dowry demand and harassing the complainant by beating her black and blue regularly and driving her out from her matrimonial house without any plausible reason, both the offences punishable under Sections 498A of Indian Penal Code and 323 of Indian Penal Code as well as the offence punishable under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act is made out. Hence, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed.

Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials in the record, this Court finds that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of harassing the complainant by beating her black and blue regularly, with a view to coerce her and the persons related to her to meet the unlawful demand of Rs.10,00,000/- to be brought by the complainant from her parents and also harassing her by driving her out from her matrimonial house, without any plausible reason. The same is sufficient to constitute the offence punishable under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code as well as the offence punishable under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Though, the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi has not mentioned that prima facie case for the offence punishable under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act having been made out but certainly at appropriate stage, the same may be taken into consideration by the court concerned. Since, there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of committing the offence punishable under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code with specific date and place of occurrence, this Court is of the considered view  that the facts of this case are different from the facts of Keshav Kumbhakar @ Keshav vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr. (supra) and Sunita Gupta vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr. (supra) hence, the ratio of those cases is not applicable to the facts of this case.

In view of the discussion made above, this Court is of the considered view that there is no justifiable reason to interfere with the order dated 26.05.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi in connection with C.P. Case No. 114 of 2022 in exercise of the power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

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