CRIMINAL MISCELLANIOUS No.38709 OF 2004 (In the matter of an application U/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) ******* 1. Mukesh Kumar S/o Shambhu Saran Prasad 2. Shambu Saran Prasad S/o Naga Prasad Both r/o Sports Club Road, Motihari P.S.Chhatauni, Disst. East Champaran. 3. Malti Sharan W/oShambhu Saran Prasad. 4. Seema Sinha W/o Panday Ramani Kant Sinha both R/O AD/5 Electricity Colony Kosai Doranda, Ranchi, State-Jharkhand. -----Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Abha Sinha D/o Jagdishwar Narain Verma Both R/O new Colony Kabir Path, Banu Chapar, Bettiah, Distt. West Champaran. -----Opp.Parties. For the Petitioner: Mr. Sangeet Deokuliar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey,APP ***** P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ***** Anjana Prakash, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners seek quashing of the entire proceeding including the order dated 28.9.2004 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah in Bettiah Muffassil P.S. Case No. 114 of 2003 by which cognizance has been under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. On 1.12.2005 the opposite party no. 2 was noticed and further proceeding in the Court below was stayed. Pursuant to it the opposite party no. 2 2 appeared and the matter was heard on 25.7.2007. This Court on making an attempt at compromise had expressed anguish at the attitude of opposite party no. 2 but decided to give her another chance. Thus on 31.7.2007 the matter was admitted for hearing. Today none appears on behalf of the opposite party no. 2. The case of the complainant/informant is that she had been married to the petitioner no. 1 in 1998 and initially she was kept happy in the matrimonial home. However, later on, the attitude of the accused persons changed especially after a daughter was born to her. The petitioner no. 1 thereafter is said to have started pressurizing the parents of the complainant to transfer the house at Bettiah in the name of petitioner no. 1 and on failure to do so the other accused persons tortured her. Finally, she left the matrimonial home in September 2002 and since then she was living in her maternal home. The present complaint was filed on 24.3.2003. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there is no doubt that the marriage had taken place in the year 1998 but unfortunately the complainant did not reside peacefully in the matrimonial home. On account of it petitioner no. 1 filed an informatory petition on 1.8.2002 before the 3 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari bringing forth the attitude of the relatives of the complainant and her unsocial behavior towards the petitioner no. 1. The further submission is that in fact the petitioners are respectable people and the entire case has been engineered only because the complainant wanted her husband to accede to her unreasonable demands. There is no doubt that the complaint has been instituted about 5-6 months after she left the matrimonial home and there is no explanation for the same. It further appears that the complaint is total lacking in material particulars and is general and vague in nature. It is not known as to why even after the incident dated 9.8.2002 no action was taken by her at any forum, and wanted till 24.3.2003 to file the complaint. In view of such observation this application is allowed and the entire proceeding including the order dated 28.9.2004 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah in Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 114 of 2003 is hereby quashed. Patna High Court Dated 15th of July 2010 Anand Kr./NAFR ( Anjana Prakash, J.)