Advertisement
Advertisement

― Advertisement ―

HomeAjay Kumar Jha vs The State Of Bihar on 10 March, 2026

Ajay Kumar Jha vs The State Of Bihar on 10 March, 2026

ADVERTISEMENT

Patna High Court

Ajay Kumar Jha vs The State Of Bihar on 10 March, 2026

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3786 of 2023
         Arising out of PS. Case No.-294 Year-2020 Thana- DARBHANGA SADAR District-
                                             Darbhanga
     ======================================================
     Ajay Kumar Jha, Son of Umesh Jha, R/o Mohalla- Sukh Nagar, P.S- K. Hat
     (Madhubani) Dist- Purnea.

                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                          Versus
1.   The State of Bihar
2.   Ridhi Kumari, Wife of Late Gaurab Kumar Mishra @ Gaurab Mishra @
     Bauwa, R/o Mohalla Sukh Nagar in front of Law College, P.S- K. Hat Dist-
     Purnea, at permanent village Babu Bhawani P.S- Gamhariya Dist-
     Madhepura

                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s    :       Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate
     For the APP             :       Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP
     For the OP No. 2        :       Mr. Sameer Ranjan, Advocate
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSUL
                           ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 10-03-2026

Heard Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar, learned counsel for the

SPONSORED

petitioner, Mr. Sameer Ranjan, learned counsel for the

Informant and Mr. Yogendra Kumar, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor.

2. Petitioner seeks quashing of the order of cognizance

dated 02.06.2022 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Darbhanga in Sadar P.S. Case No. 294 of 2020 for the offences

under Sections 498A, 323, 448, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian

Penal Code and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act.

3. The prosecution case is that the informant namely
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3786 of 2023 dt.10-03-2026
2/3

Ridhi Kumari gave a written report to the Officer In-charge,

Sadar Darbhanga stating therein that her marriage was

solemnized with one Gaurav Kumar Mishra on 03.06.2015

according to Hindu rites and rituals and the family member of

her husband demanded Rs. 5,00,000/- as a dowry and on non-

fulfilment of the same they started torturing and harassing to

her. It is further alleged that on 05.07.2020, the accused persons

came to the house of the informant and they forcibly took away

the son of the informant aged about four years namely Rishu

Kumar.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

husband of the informant has died in an motor vehicle accident

in the district of Purnea for which K. Nagar P.S. Case No. 94 of

2019 was registered under Sections 279, 427, 304A IPC against

the driver of that vehicle. He further submits that the petitioner

is an Advocate for which a certificate has been issued by the

Secretary, District Bar Association, Purnea on 05.09.2020. It is

also submitted that there is a family dispute and the child of the

lady has been taken away by her in-laws and petitioner being

Lawyer in another case has been implicated in this case. It

seems that he is having no relation with the dispute between the

parties.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3786 of 2023 dt.10-03-2026
3/3

5. Learned counsel for the Informant as well as learned

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently

opposed the prayer for quashing of the impugned order of

cognizance dated 02.06.2022.

6. The roots of the instant dispute seems to be elsewhere.

The petitioner, being an Advocate, has been implicated for

representing the adversary in another case. He has no

connection with the family dispute. The instant prosecution thus

is a malicious prosecution.

7. In such view of the matter, the order of cognizance

dated 02.06.2022 passed in Sadar P.S. Case No. 294 of 2020 by

learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga is quashed so far

as the petitioner is concerned.

8. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed.

(Ansul, J)
Vikash/-

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE                N/A
Uploading Date
Transmission Date
 



Source link