Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.40376 of 2011 ====================================================== 1. Sri Bhagwan Prasad S/O Sri Nirmal Prasad, R/O Hariji Ka Hatta, Dumraon, P.S- Dumraon, Distt.-Buxar, (Bihar) 2. Smt. Sita Devi W/O Nirmal Prasad, R/O Hariji Ka Hatta, Dumraon, P.S- Dumraon, Distt.-Buxar, (Bihar) 3. Sri Nirmal Prasad S/O Late Rameshwar Prasad, R/O Hariji Ka Hatta, Dumraon, P.S- Dumraon, Distt.-Buxar, (Bihar) .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Premsheela Devi W/O Sri Bhagawan Prasad, D/O Sri Balram Prasad, R/O Hariji Ka Hatta, Dumraon, P.S- Dumraon, Distt. Buxar, (Bihar) At Present Residing at Village Bandhu Chapra, P.S. - Barhara, Distt.-Bhojpur, Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akhileshwar Pd. Singh, Sr. Adv. and Mrs. Anita Kumari Singh, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 4 11-12-2012 Heard the parties. The court below by the impugned order dated 12th October 2011 refused to discharge the petitioner. A Complaint Case No. 653(C)/2007 was lodged against these petitioners, as petitioner No. 1 is the husband, petitioner No. 2 is mother-in-law and petitioner No. 3 is the father- in-law. Allegation has been made that the marriage was solemnized on 14th December 2005 and thereafter, all the accused persons tortured the O.P. No. 2 while she was living with them at in-laws’ house. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40376 of 2011 (4) dt.11-12-2012 2/3 The court below has taken cognizance for offence [STATUTE] ct. An application for discharge was filed and vide order dated 12th October 2011 the court below refused to discharge the petitioners and recorded that there are sufficient materials for framing of the charge against petitioners. This case was adjourned on 5th December 2012 for taking instruction from the O.P. No. 2 with regard to settle the dispute in terms of money, as on that day both the parties were agreeable that they cannot live together. Today when the case was called out the counsel for the petitioner has made a statement that his client is ready to pay Rs. 30,000/- maximum Rs. 50,000/- in two instalments by way of full and final settlement but the counsel for the opposite party is not agreeable to offer made by the counsel for the petitioners and, as such, this Court is deciding the case on its merit. The counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has produced the evidence of the parties to show, sufficient materials are available for framing of charge. This Court has perused the evidence of witness examined before the charge and this Court agrees with the order of the court below that the materials are available for creating strong suspicion against the petitioners Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40376 of 2011 (4) dt.11-12-2012 3/3 This Court does not find any error in the order impugned. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. If good sense would prevail upon the parties, they will have liberty to take appropriate steps before the court below and the court below will consider the petition and pass the appropriate order in accordance with law if any such application is filed by the parties. Mahesh/- (Shivaji Pandey, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 498A

Statute Text:
Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Punishment for subjecting a married woman to Cruelty. Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.