Patna High Court
Pranav Kumar Narayan vs The State Of Bihar on 26 March, 2025
Author: Chandra Shekhar Jha
Bench: Chandra Shekhar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32568 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-418 Year-2022 Thana- AURANGABAD TOWN District-
Aurangabad
======================================================
Pranav Kumar Narayan S/o Anil Kumar Chaturvedi Resident of Mohalla
Gyanpuri, Road No. 3, New Area Aurangabad, P.S. - Aurangabad (town),
Dist. - Aurangabad (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Smt. Sakshi Pandey W/o Pranav Kumar Narayan, D/o Ashwani Pandey
Presently resides at House no. TRTB 12/1A C.C Colony P.O and P.S. -
Barmana, Tahsil Sadar, Distt. - Bilashpur, Himachal Pradesh.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 21561 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-418 Year-2022 Thana- AURANGABAD TOWN District-
Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Swarn Prabha Chaturvedi @Prabha Devi @ Swarn Prabha Wife Of Anil
Kumar Chaturvedi Resident Of Village- Gayanpuri Road No. 3, New Area
Aurangabad, Ps- Aurangabad, Town, Distt- Aurangabad.
2. Anil Kumar Chaturvedi Son Of Late Janadan Choubey Resident Of Village-
Gayanpuri Road No. 3, New Area Aurangabad, Ps- Aurangabad, Town,
Distt- Aurangabad.
3. Prashant Kumar Chaturvedi @ Prashant Kumar Son Of Anil Kumar
Chaturvedi Resident Of Village- Gayanpuri Road No. 3, New Area
Aurangabad, Ps- Aurangabad, Town, Distt- Aurangabad.
4. Prashun Kumar Chaturvedi @ Prashun Kumar Narayan Son Of Anil Kumar
Chaturvedi Resident Of Village- Gayanpuri Road No. 3, New Area
Aurangabad, Ps- Aurangabad, Town, Distt- Aurangabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar.
2. Sakshi Pandey, W/o Pranav Kumar Narayan, D/o Ashwani Pandey, presently
residing at House No. TRTB 12/1A C.C Colony P.O and P.S. - Barmana,
Tahsil Sadar, Distt. - Bilashpur, Himachal Pradesh.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 32568 of 2024)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amarendra Narayan, Advocate
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
2/17
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 21561 of 2024)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amarendra Narayan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ahmad Ali, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 26-03-2025
Cr. Misc. No. 32568 of 2024
Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
parties.
2. The present petition preferred to quash the
impugned order dated 11.01.2024 passed in Town P.S. Case No.
418 of 2022 (C.I.S. 1484/2023) as passed by learned C.J.M.,
Aurangabad, whereby and whereunder the learned court has taken
cognizance against this petitioner and other family members for
the offences under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and
Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The crux of the prosecution case, as it appears from
written information of the informant/opposite party no. 2, namely,
Sakshi Pandey that her marriage was solemnized with
petitioner/husband as per Hindu Rites and Rituals on 18.06.2017
at U.S. Residency, Aurangabad in presence of both family
members and relatives. After marriage she joined her matrimonial
house with all gifts which was given on the occasion of marriage by
her parents, which was golden jewelery worth of Rs. 10,70,900/-,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
3/17
car of Rs. 4.5 lacs, furnitur and utensils etc.
4. It is narrated thereof that after joining matrimonial
home, a further demand of Rs. 10 lacs was raised and due to non-
fulfillment of said demand, her mother-in-law did not allow her to
sleep with her husband. It is submitted that on different occasions
for non-fulfillment of aforesaid demand, she was humiliated by her
in-laws and finally her entire Stridhan was kept by her in-laws and
she was forcibly ousted from her matrimonial house, consequent
upon, she lodged a case at Barmana police station. It was stated
that torture still continued by one or another means on behalf of
petitioner and his family members.
5. With aforesaid allegation, Town P.S. Case No. 418
of 2022 was instituted on 11.07.2022, whereafter investigation,
the police submitted charge sheet against petitioner for the
offences punishable under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal
Code and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
6. Agreeing with charge sheet as submitted by police,
the learned Judicial Magistrate took cognizance for aforesaid
offences qua petitioner and other co-accused persons.
7. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner that both parties settled their issues and differences by
way of compromise and they decided to dissolve their marriage by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
4/17
way of mutual divorce as per legal provisions available under
Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act. It is pointed out that the
issue of maintenance also resolved by way of permanent alimony
against one time payment of Rs. 14 lacs, where already Rs. 7 lacs
was paid to opposite party no. 2 vide DD No. 380614 dated
21.09.2024
issued by SBI, Aurangabad, whereas for balance of
Rs. 7 lacs, Demand draft has already drawn as issued on
21.03.2025, being number “191756” from same bank, which shall
be hand over to opposite party no. 2 on the date of second
motion/order of dissolution of marriage. It is submitted that this
fact also transpires from the order dated 25.09.2024 as passed
by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad. Learned
counsel also submitted that this fact also brought on record
through 2nd Supplementary Affidavit dated 22.03.2025 by
petitioner. While concluding the argument, it is submitted that in
view aforesaid compromise, continuing of present proceeding
before the court below would only amount to abuse the process of
court of law and, therefore, same is fit to be quashed/set aside, in
view of legal ratio as available through legal report of Hon’ble
Supreme Court, in the matter of Abhisek Vs. State of Madhya
Pradesh, reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1083.
8. It appears from the perusal of record that notice qua
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
5/17
present proceeding was received by mother of opposite party no.
2, where she was residing and the said fact was brought on record
by way of affidavit.
9. In view of aforesaid, notice was found validly served
upon opposite party no. 2, where despite of knowledge of present
proceeding, opposite party no. 2 failed to join the present
proceedings.
10. It would be apposite to reproduce para-13, 14, 15,
16 & 17 of the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in
the case of Abhishek vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in
2023 SCC Online SC 1083, which are as under:-
“13. Instances of a husband’s family
members filing a petition to quash criminal
proceedings launched against them by his
wife in the midst of matrimonial disputes are
neither a rarity nor of recent origin.
Precedents aplenty abound on this score. We
may now take note of some decisions of
particular relevance. Recently, in Kahkashan
Kausar alias Sonam v. State of Bihar
[(2022) 6 SCC 599], this Court had
occasion to deal with a similar situation where
the High Court had refused to quash a FIR
registered for various offences, including
Section 498A IPC. Noting that the foremost
issue that required determination was
whether allegations made against the in-laws
were general omnibus allegations which
would be liable to be quashed, this Court
referred to earlier decisions wherein concern
was expressed over the misuse of Section
498A IPC and the increased tendency to
implicate relatives of the husband in
matrimonial disputes. This Court observed
that false implications by way of general
omnibus allegations made in the course of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
6/17matrimonial disputes, if left unchecked, would
result in misuse of the process of law. On the
facts of that case, it was found that no
specific allegations were made against the in-
laws by the wife and it was held that allowing
their prosecution in the absence of clear
allegations against the in-laws would result in
an abuse of the process of law. It was also
noted that a criminal trial, leading to an
eventual acquittal, would inflict severe scars
upon the accused and such an exercise ought
to be discouraged.
14. In Preeti Gupta v. State of
Jharkhand [(2010) 7 SCC 667], this
Court noted that the tendency to implicate the
husband and all his immediate relations is
also not uncommon in complaints filed under
Section 498A IPC. It was observed that the
Courts have to be extremely careful and
cautious in dealing with these complaints and
must take pragmatic realities into
consideration while dealing with matrimonial
cases, as allegations of harassment by
husband’s close relations, who were living in
different cities and never visited or rarely
visited the place where the complainant
resided, would add an entirely different
complexion and such allegations would have
to be scrutinised with great care and
circumspection.
15. Earlier, in Neelu Chopra v. Bharti
[(2009) 10 SCC 184], this Court observed
that the mere mention of statutory provisions
and the language thereof, for lodging a
complaint, is not the ‘be all and end all’ of the
matter, as what is required to be brought to
the notice of the Court is the particulars of
the offence committed by each and every
accused and the role played by each and
every accused in the commission of that
offence. These observations were made in the
context of a matrimonial dispute involving
Section 498A IPC.
16. Of more recent origin is the decision of
this Court in Mahmood Ali v. State of U.P.
(Criminal Appeal No. 2341 of 2023,
decided on 08.08.2023) on the legal
principles applicable apropos Section 482 Cr.
P.C. Therein, it was observed that when an
accused comes before the High Court,
invoking either the inherent power under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
7/17Section 482 Cr. P.C. or the extraordinary
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution, to get the FIR or the criminal
proceedings quashed, essentially on the
ground that such proceedings are manifestly
frivolous or vexatious or instituted with the
ulterior motive of wreaking vengeance, then
in such circumstances, the High Court owes a
duty to look into the FIR with care and a little
more closely. It was further observed that it
will not be enough for the Court to look into
the averments made in the FIR/complaint
alone for the purpose of ascertaining whether
the necessary ingredients to constitute the
alleged offence are disclosed or not as, in
frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court
owes a duty to look into many other attending
circumstances emerging from the record of
the case over and above the averments and,
if need be, with due care and circumspection,
to try and read between the lines.
17. In State of Haryana and Ors. Vs.
Bhajan Lal and Ors [(1992) Supp (1)
SCC 335], this Court had set out, by way of
illustration, the broad categories of cases in
which the inherent power under Section 482
Cr. P.C. could be exercised. Para 102 of the
decision reads as follows:
‘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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
8/17constitute any offence or make out a case
against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first
information 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 any 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
person 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 Act concerned (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
Act concerned, providing efficacious redress
for the 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.”
11. In view of aforesaid factual and legal submission as
the dispute was settled between the parties by way of
compromise, where both parties decided to dissolve their marriage
by way of mutual divorce against permanent alimony of 14 lacs,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
9/17
out of which 7 lacs already received by opposite party no. 2
whereas for balance payment of Rs. 7 lacs the draft is already
prepared, which shall be hand over to opposite party no. 2 today
itself before the leaned trial court.
12. Considering the aforesaid fact, continuing of present
proceedings appears only amounting to abuse the process of court
of law, in view of taking a guiding notes of Abhishek‘s case
(supra), impugned order of cognizance dated 11.01.2024 passed
in Town P.S. Case No. 418 of 2022 (C.I.S. 1484/2023) passed by
learned C.J.M., Aurangabad is hereby set aside and quashed qua
petitioner with all its consequential proceedings.
13. Let copy of this order be sent to the trial court,
without delay.
Cr. Misc. No. 21561 of 2024
Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
parties.
2. The present petition preferred to quash the
impugned order dated 11.01.2024 passed in Town P.S. Case No.
418 of 2022 (C.I.S. 1484/2023) as passed by learned C.J.M.,
Aurangabad, whereby and whereunder the learned court has taken
cognizance against this petitioner and other family members for
the offences under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
10/17
Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The crux of the prosecution case, as it appears from
written information of the informant/opposite party no. 2, namely,
Sakshi Pandey that her marriage was solemnized with Pranav
Kumar Narayan/husband as per Hindu Rites and Rituals on
18.06.2017 at U.S. Residency, Aurangabad in presence of both
family members and relatives. After marriage she joined her
matrimonial house with all gifts which was given on the occasion of
marriage by her parents, which was golden jewelery worth of Rs.
10,70,900/-, a car of Rs. 4.5 lacs, furnitur and utensils etc.
4. It is narrated thereof that after joining matrimonial
home, a further demand of Rs. 10 lacs was raised and due to non-
fulfillment of said demand, her mother-in-law did not allow her to
sleep with her husband. It is submitted that on different occasions
for non-fulfillment of aforesaid demand, she was humiliated by her
in-laws and finally her entire Stridhan was kept by her in-laws and
she was forcibly ousted from her matrimonial house, consequent
upon, she lodged a case at Barmana police station. It was stated
that torture still continued by one or another means on behalf of
petitioners.
5. With aforesaid allegation, Town P.S. Case No. 418
of 2022 was instituted on 11.07.2022, whereafter investigation,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
11/17
the police submitted charge sheet against petitioners for the
offences punishable under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal
Code and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
6. Agreeing with charge sheet as submitted by police,
the learned Judicial Magistrate took cognizance for aforesaid
offences qua petitioners.
7. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners that petitioners being in-laws facing general and
omnibus allegations qua alleged cruelty as committed against
opposite party no. 2. It is submitted that both parties settled their
issues and differences by way of compromise and they decided to
dissolve their marriage by way of mutual divorce as per legal
provisions available under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act.
It is pointed out that the issue of maintenance also resolved by
way of permanent alimony against one time payment of Rs. 14
lacs, where already Rs. 7 lacs was paid to opposite party no. 2 vide
DD No. 380614 dated 21.09.2024 issued by SBI, Aurangabad,
whereas for balance of Rs. 7 lacs, Demand draft has already drawn
as issued on 21.03.2025,being number, “191756” from same
bank, which shall be hand over to opposite party no. 2 on the date
of second motion/order of dissolution of marriage. It is submitted
that this fact also transpires from the order dated 25.09.2024 as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
12/17
passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad.
Learned counsel also submitted that this fact also brought on
record through 2nd Supplementary Affidavit dated 22.03.2025 by
her husband in Cr. Misc. No. 32568 of 2024. While concluding the
argument, it is submitted that in view aforesaid compromise,
continuing of present proceeding before the court below would
only amount to abuse the process of court of law and, therefore,
same is fit to be quashed/set aside, in view of legal ratio as
available through legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the
matter of Abhisek Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in
2023 SCC OnLine SC 1083.
8. It appears from the perusal of record that notice qua
present proceeding was received by mother of opposite party no.
2, where she was residing and the said fact was brought on record
by way of affidavit.
9. In view of aforesaid notice was found validly served
upon opposite party no. 2, where despite of knowledge of present
proceeding, opposite party no. 2 failed to join the present
proceedings.
10. It would be apposite to reproduce para-13, 14, 15,
16 & 17 of the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in
the case of Abhishek vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
13/17
2023 SCC Online SC 1083, which are as under:-
“13. Instances of a husband’s family
members filing a petition to quash criminal
proceedings launched against them by his
wife in the midst of matrimonial disputes are
neither a rarity nor of recent origin.
Precedents aplenty abound on this score. We
may now take note of some decisions of
particular relevance. Recently, in Kahkashan
Kausar alias Sonam v. State of Bihar
[(2022) 6 SCC 599], this Court had
occasion to deal with a similar situation where
the High Court had refused to quash a FIR
registered for various offences, including
Section 498A IPC. Noting that the foremost
issue that required determination was
whether allegations made against the in-laws
were general omnibus allegations which
would be liable to be quashed, this Court
referred to earlier decisions wherein concern
was expressed over the misuse of Section
498A IPC and the increased tendency to
implicate relatives of the husband in
matrimonial disputes. This Court observed
that false implications by way of general
omnibus allegations made in the course of
matrimonial disputes, if left unchecked, would
result in misuse of the process of law. On the
facts of that case, it was found that no
specific allegations were made against the in-
laws by the wife and it was held that allowing
their prosecution in the absence of clear
allegations against the in-laws would result in
an abuse of the process of law. It was also
noted that a criminal trial, leading to an
eventual acquittal, would inflict severe scars
upon the accused and such an exercise ought
to be discouraged.
14. In Preeti Gupta v. State of
Jharkhand [(2010) 7 SCC 667], this
Court noted that the tendency to implicate the
husband and all his immediate relations is
also not uncommon in complaints filed under
Section 498A IPC. It was observed that the
Courts have to be extremely careful and
cautious in dealing with these complaints and
must take pragmatic realities into
consideration while dealing with matrimonial
cases, as allegations of harassment by
husband’s close relations, who were living in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
14/17different cities and never visited or rarely
visited the place where the complainant
resided, would add an entirely different
complexion and such allegations would have
to be scrutinised with great care and
circumspection.
15. Earlier, in Neelu Chopra v. Bharti
[(2009) 10 SCC 184], this Court observed
that the mere mention of statutory provisions
and the language thereof, for lodging a
complaint, is not the ‘be all and end all’ of the
matter, as what is required to be brought to
the notice of the Court is the particulars of
the offence committed by each and every
accused and the role played by each and
every accused in the commission of that
offence. These observations were made in the
context of a matrimonial dispute involving
Section 498A IPC.
16. Of more recent origin is the decision of
this Court in Mahmood Ali v. State of U.P.
(Criminal Appeal No. 2341 of 2023,
decided on 08.08.2023) on the legal
principles applicable apropos Section 482 Cr.
P.C. Therein, it was observed that when an
accused comes before the High Court,
invoking either the inherent power under
Section 482 Cr. P.C. or the extraordinary
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution, to get the FIR or the criminal
proceedings quashed, essentially on the
ground that such proceedings are manifestly
frivolous or vexatious or instituted with the
ulterior motive of wreaking vengeance, then
in such circumstances, the High Court owes a
duty to look into the FIR with care and a little
more closely. It was further observed that it
will not be enough for the Court to look into
the averments made in the FIR/complaint
alone for the purpose of ascertaining whether
the necessary ingredients to constitute the
alleged offence are disclosed or not as, in
frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court
owes a duty to look into many other attending
circumstances emerging from the record of
the case over and above the averments and,
if need be, with due care and circumspection,
to try and read between the lines.
17. In State of Haryana and Ors. Vs.
Bhajan Lal and Ors [(1992) Supp (1)
SCC 335], this Court had set out, by way of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
15/17illustration, the broad categories of cases in
which the inherent power under Section 482
Cr. P.C. could be exercised. Para 102 of the
decision reads as follows:
‘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
information 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 any 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
16/17improbable on the basis of which no prudent
person 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 Act concerned (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
Act concerned, providing efficacious redress
for the 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.”
11. In view of aforesaid factual and legal submission as
the dispute was settled between the parties by way of
compromise, where both parties decided to dissolve their marriage
by way of mutual divorce against permanent alimony of 14 lacs,
out of which 7 lacs already received by opposite party no. 2
whereas for balance payment of Rs. 7 lacs the draft is already
prepared, which shall be hand over to opposite party no. 2 today
itself before the leaned trial court.
12. Considering the aforesaid fact, continuing of present
proceedings appears only amounting to abuse the process of court
of law, in view of taking a guiding note of Abhishek‘s case
(supra), impugned order of cognizance dated 11.01.2024 passed
in Town P.S. Case No. 418 of 2022 (C.I.S. 1484/2023) passed by
learned C.J.M., Aurangabad is hereby set aside and quashed qua
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32568 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
17/17
petitioners with all its consequential proceedings.
13. Let copy of this order be sent to the trial court,
without delay.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 29.03.2025 Transmission Date 29.03.2025
[ad_1]
Source link