Patna High Court
Ram Pravesh Singh And Ors vs The State Of Bihar And Anr on 16 July, 2026
Author: Chandra Shekhar Jha
Bench: Chandra Shekhar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19083 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-170 Year-2018 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE District-
Rohtas
======================================================
1. Ram Pravesh Singh S/O Late Kamal Dhari Singh Resident Of Village-
Dhanawan English, P.S.- Nasriganj, District- Rohtas.
2. Kamla Devi W/O Ram Pravesh Singh Resident Of Village-Dhanawan
English, P.S.-Nasriganj, District-Rohtas
3. Ranjeet Singh Son Of Ram Pravesh Singh Resident Of Village-Dhanawan
English, P.S.-Nasriganj, District-Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Kumari Kishlay Wife of Late Baljeet Singh, Resident of Village-Dhanawan
English, P.S.-Nasriganj, District-Rohtas. At present Daughter of Raj Kumar
Yadav @ Raju Yadav, R/Mohalla-Gopalganj, north of Sasaram Railway
Station, Sasaram, P.S.-Sasaram (Town), District-Rohtas.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar Mishra
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anand Mohan Prasad Mehta
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 16-07-2026
1. Heard the parties.
2. Present petition preferred by the petitioner
under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (in short
Cr.P.C.) for quashing of order dated 24.07.2018, passed by
learned S.D.J.M, Sasaram, Rohtas, in Complaint P.S. Case
no. 170 of 2018.
3. As per complaint case complainant married
Baljit Singh (son of petitioner no.1 and 2) on 27.04.2015 as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19083 of 2019 dt.16-07-2026
2/5
per Hindu rites. She claimed her father gave substantial
dowry yet after the “Vedai,” the accused began taunting her
for insufficient dowry and pressurising her and her husband
to bring a Maruti car, subjecting her to abuse and cruelty.
The complainant further alleged that when her husband fell
seriously ill on duty, she was denied access to him by her in-
laws, and he later died during treatment at a Varanasi
hospital. After his last rites, she alleged the accused
intensified their cruelty abusing her, confining her for two
days allegedly to push her toward suicide, withdrawing her
deceased husband’s funds, and pressuring her to marry
petitioner no. 3. She further alleged that on 19.02.2018, the
accused assaulted her, snatched her ornaments, motorcycle,
and her husband’s mobile phone, then dropped her at her
father’s house with threats.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of
petitioner that husband of complainant/ O.P. No. 2 and son
of petitioner no. 1 and 2 and the brother of petitioner no. 3
died in the year 2017 just after 2 years of his marriage with
complainant due to certain ailments at Banaras. It is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19083 of 2019 dt.16-07-2026
3/5
submitted that after his death the complainant got job on
compensate ground in Indian Railway, where her husband
was working. It is submitted that to check petitioner no. 3
who is the brother of the deceased husband from joint
property, the present false case was lodged. It is submitted
that with general and omnibus allegation all petitioners were
implicated with present crime in question which is purely
unfounded.
5. Arguing further, it is submitted that
complainant/ O.P. No. 2 solemnized her second marriage
after death of the son of the petitioner no. 1 and 2 as
discussed aforesaid and enjoying her married life having one
child out of said wedlock.
6. Learned counsel for the informant Dharmendra
Kr. Singh could not disputed the aforesaid factual
submission.
7. In view of aforesaid, learned counsel relied
upon paragraph no. 102 of the Apex Court decision in the
case of State of Haryana and Others vs. Bhajan Lal and
Others reported in 1992 Supp (1) Supreme Court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19083 of 2019 dt.16-07-2026
4/5
Cases 335, which reads as under:
“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the
various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter
XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this
Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise
of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the
inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which
we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the
following categories of cases by way of illustration
wherein such power could be exercised either to
prevent abuse of the process of any court or
otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may
not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly
defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible
guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive
list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power
should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first
information report or the complaint, even if they are
taken at their face value and accepted in their
entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or
make out a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first informant report
and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do
not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an
investigation by police officers under Section 156(1)
of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate
within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the
FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in
support of the same do not disclose the commission
of nay offence and make out a case against the
accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not
constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a
non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted
by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as
contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or
complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on
the basis of which no prudent persons can ever reach
a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for
proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in
any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned
Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted)
to the institution and continuance of the proceedings
and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code
or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19083 of 2019 dt.16-07-2026
5/5the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly
attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding
is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for
wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view
to spite him due to private and personal grudge.”
8. In view of aforesaid submission and by taking
note of materials available on record, it appears that to
settle private vengeance present complaint case are lodged
by complainant with general and omnibus allegation of
cruelty. Petitioners are in-laws and complainant already
solemnized her another marriage.
9. Considering aforesaid and further by taking
note of golden principle of “Para-7″ of Bhajan Lal case
(supra), the cognizance order qua above named three
petitioners, dated 24.07.2018 stands quashed/ set aside.
10. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the
learned trial court forthwith.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Sudha/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 16.07.2026 Transmission Date 16.07.2026
