RANI KANTI SINHA W/O DR PASHUPATI PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND SMT PUNAM LAL D/O OF LATE SADANAND LAL W/O DR PASHUPATI PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of an order dated 12.2.1999 passed by Sri R. Prakash, Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur in Complaint Case No. C 27 of 1996 by which the learned Magistrate has refused to discharge the petitioner.

(2.) Short fact of the case is that the opposite party No. 2 filed aforesaid complaint disclosing therein that she was married with one Sri Pashupati Prasad on 22.1.1990, according to Baidik rites in the Deoghar temple and thereafter, she went to the village Dharhara. It was specifically made clear in the complaint petition that accused Pashupati Prasad by way of suppression of the fact that the present petitioner, who was his first wife, solemnized marriage with the complainant on 22.1.1990. It was further alleged that after the marriage, Pashupati Prasad, who was made Accused No. 1 in Complaint Case No. C 27 of 1996, started to put pressure on the complainant for bringing dowry. As per complaint petition in the marriage itself, the accused Pashupati Prasad was adequately given dowry. However, the accused persons started torturing the complainant. The complainant disclosed that the present petitioner, who was first wife of accused Pashupati Prasad, was doing the job of Nurse and she was posted at Gaya and when she came back, she also joined along with her husband in torturing the complainant. In the complaint petition, it was also disclosed that the accused Pashupati Prasad was contemplating to sell out the house where the complainant was residing and subsequently, mother of the complainant intervened and agreement was entered in between the mother of the complainant and Pashupati Prasad that he will sell the house, which was at village Dharhara to the mother of complainant on a consideration amount of Rs. 80,000/-, which was paid by the mother of the complainant to the accused. However, subsequently, the accused Pashupati Prasad retreated from his earlier agreement.

(3.) The complainant disclosed in the complaint petition that in the year 1994 on one day the accused Pashupati Prasad along with this petitioner and others forcibly tried to lift the complainant from the house and they started to drag her to a car, which was standing outside the house, but in the meanwhile, after the alarm was raised by the complainant, several villagers assembled and rescued the complainant. For this occurrence as stated in paragraph-6 of the complaint petition, the complainant filed a complaint in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger, which was transferred to the police. However, the police did not take any action in the case. However, subsequently, due to torture the complainant left the house of her husband and started to reside at Bhagalpur with her mother and thereafter, complaint petition vide Complaint Case No. C 27 of 1996 was filed by the opposite party No. 2(complainant) in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur for offence under Sections 494, 495, 452, 464, 466, 420, 406, 489, 148, 149, 498A, 109 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code as also 380, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.