MANISH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present application preferred under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "CrPC"), the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dtd. 22/4/2013 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur in Goraul (Kathara O.P.) P.S. Case No. 318 of 2012 whereby and where under the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offences punishable under Sec. 498A of the Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC") as also under Sec. the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short "D.P.Act) against the petitioner.

(2.) It would appear from perusal of the FIR as contained in annexure-1 to the present application that wife of the petitioner initially instituted a complaint in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur which was referred to the police under Sec. 156(3) of the CrPC for investigation pursuant to which an FIR was instituted under Sec. 341, 323, 504 and 498A read with 34 of the IPC as also under Sec. the D.P.Act. The police investigated the case and found the allegations of demand of dowry and subjecting the complainant to cruelty for non-fulfillment of the same against the petitioner to be true and, accordingly, a report under Sec. 173(2) of the CrPC was filed in the court vide charge-sheet no.68 of 2013 dtd. 17/3/2013. It would further appear from the record that after going through the allegations made in the FIR, materials collected during investigation and the report submitted under Sec. 173(2) of the CrPC, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur found a prima facie case to be made out against the petitioner under Sec. 498A read with 34 of the IPC as also under Sec. the D.P.Act.

(3.) It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations made in the FIR are not true and the complaint leading to institution of FIR has been filed just in order to humiliate and harass the petitioner. He has further contended that while passing the impugned order the Chief Judicial Magistrate has not applied his mind to the facts of the case and cognizance of the offences has been taken mechanically.