PRABHAKAR JHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for quashing the order dated 22.5.2004 passed by learned-Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar in P.C. R. Case No. 108 of 2002 corresponding to T.R. No. 49 of 2003/ 224,of 2004 whereby and where under the application filed: by the petitioners for discharge has been rejected.

(2.) The facts of the case in brief is that the daughter of complainant (O.P. No. 2), namely Smt. Sweta Kashyap (Jha) was married to Prabhakar Jha (Petitioner No. 1) on 8.2.2001 at Deoghar. It is further stated that in the marriage the parents and other relatives had given ornaments, musical instruments, house hold appliances and furniture etc. as gift to Sweta Kashyap. It is further stated that the said property belongs to Sweta Kashyap as her Stridhan. It is further stated that Sweta Kashyap took those properties to Kolkata and entrusted the same to the accused persons for keeping them in safe custody. It is further alleged that after the lapse of some time the complainant's daughter Sweta Kashyap found that her husband, Prabhakar Jha was incapable to establish sexual relation with her due to impotency. It is further alleged that because of the said reason there was strain relation between Sweta Kashyap and Prabhakar Jha. It is also alleged that because of the aforesaid reason Prabhakar Jha always torture the said Sweta Kashyap and due to the said torture, she was admitted in Intensive Care Unit of Appolo Hdspital. Kolkata for treatment. It is further alleged that the complainant after receiving information regarding the illness of his daughter went to Kolkata and she was brought to Deoghar after being discharged from hospital. It is alleged that the marriage between Sweta Kashyap and Prabhakar Jha, broken due to the impotency of petitioner No. 1. It is further stated that in view of break of marriage, a notice was given to the petitioners for returning the Stridhan of Sweta Kashyap, which she had entrusted to them for keeping in safe custody, but the accused persons did not give any heed to the request of complainant and / or Sweta Kashyap and thereby they have committed an offence of criminal breach of trust punishable under Section 406 of the IPC.

(3.) It appears that on the basis of aforesaid complaint petition, P.C.R. Case No. 108 of 2002 was instituted by the CJM, Deoghar. It further appears that the complainant was examined on S.A. and thereafter other witnesses were also examined during inquiry and thereafter the summons were issued against the accused persons under Section 204 of the Cr.P.C. It appears that thereafter the accused persons appeared and filed a discharge petition in the court below which was rejected by the impugned order against that the present application has been filed.