Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.25724 of 2009 ====================================================== 1. Indra Pratap Thakur, son of late Chandrika Thakur 2. Ambika Devi, wife of Indra Pratap Thakur 3. Keshwendra Pratap Thakur @ Manoj 4. Madhavendra Pratap Thakur @ Sanjay 5. Dharmendra Pratap Thakur @ Narayan No. 3 to 5 are sons of Indra Pratap Thakur, all resident of village Ratanpur, P.S. Kamtaul, Distt. Darbhanga. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Sureshwar Pratap Shahi, son of lae Lakshmeshwar Pratap Shahi, r/o village & P.S. Sursand, Distt. Sitamarhi. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushkar Narain Shahi Mr. Kaushalesh Singh For the State : Mr. P. Mehta, A.P.P. For the Opposite Party No. 2 : Mr. Ajey Kumar, ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER 5. 09-04-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners seek quashing of the entire proceeding including the order dated 19.6.2009 passed by the Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pupri, Sitamarhi, in Complaint Case No. C 1/135 of 2006, Trial No. 1202 of 2009 by which cognizance under [STATUTE] has been taken. The case of the Complainant is that the accused persons who were closely related to him took away his mother Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25724 of 2009 (5) dt.09-04-2012 2 / 3 2 along with jewellery where after her whereabouts were not known. It was alleged that the accused persons had committed her murder and misappropriated the ornaments and money on her. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the Complainant had earlier filed another Complaint petition which was forwarded to the Police under Section 156(3) Cr. P.C. and Sursand P.S. Case No. 25 of 2005 was instituted against the petitioners which ended in a final report. During investigation, it had transpired that the mother of the Complainant in fact, had died a natural death on 7.1.2005 and there was civil dispute going on between the parties. It is for this reason that final report in the matter was submitted. The submission of the petitioners is that they are respectable persons and the petitioner No. 2 happens to be the sister of the Opposite party No. 2 whereas petitioner No. 1 is her husband and petitioners No. 3, 4 and 5 are her sons. It is admitted that the mother of petitioner No. 2 died on 7.1.2005 while she was living with her on account of her old age and illness for which a Death Certificate was issued by M.B.B.S., D.O.M.S., a Doctor of Muzaffarpur, thereafter, she was cremated with all rituals. Unfortunately, the Opposite party No. 2 had a grouse with the petitioner No. 2 and her family members on account of some Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25724 of 2009 (5) dt.09-04-2012 3 / 3 3 dispute over share in property and it was for this reason that the present Complaint was filed with absurd unsubstantiated wild allegations. The further submission is that in the facts of the case, no offence under [STATUTE] is made out since there is no element of kidnapping in the present case. On the other hand, the counsel for the Opposite party No. 2 is not in a position to factually dispute the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners and concedes that there was land dispute between the parties. Having heard the parties and gone through the records of the case, I am inclined to accept the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners that the continuance of the proceedings in the facts mentioned above is a sheer abuse of the process of the Court and set aside the proceedings. In the result, the application is allowed and the entire proceeding including the order dated 19.6.2009 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pupri, Sitamarhi, in connection with Complaint Case No. C 1/135 of 2006 is hereby quashed. S.Ali (Anjana Prakash, J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 365

Statute Text:
Section 365 of the Indian Penal Code. Kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine a person. Whoever kidnaps or abducts any person with intent to cause that person to be secretly and wrongfully confined, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.