IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.46201 of 2007 1. BABY DEVI, WIFE OF UMESH PRASAD SINGH. 2. UMESH PRASAD SINGH, SON OF LATE SAHDEO SINGH, BOTH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SHIVNAR, P.S. MOKAMA, DISTRICT PATNA. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. SARASWATI KUMARI, DAUGHTER OF LATE RAM PADARATH CHOUDHARY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ALAPUR, P.S. TEGHRA, DISTRICT BEGUSARAI. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- OPPOSITE PARTIES For the petitioners :- Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P. ----------- 4 28.3.2011 Notices have been issued to opposite party no. 2. Nobody appears on behalf of opposite party no. 2 although Vakalatnama has been filed on her behalf. One Saraswati Kumari, D/o Late Ram Padarath Choudhary had filed a case against her husband Gunjan Kumar, his aunt and uncle (Fua and Fufi) on 22.7.2005 numbered as 1342C of 2005 alleging that the petitioner and her husband had demanded dowry for their nephew Gunjan Kumar. Gunjan Kumar used to assault his wife in lieu of the demand of dowry. After two years the present complaint has been instituted in which a different story has been disclosed by the complainant Saraswati Kumari. In the present case i.e. Complaint Case No. 300C of 2007, it has been alleged that the petitioners and her husband came to her house and requested her (complainant’s) mother to allow the complainant to go with them in order to complete her education. It is said that the complainant was studying in school at the relevant time. It has been alleged that after few days her signature was taken on few 2 documents. It was further alleged that her mother was called with a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- and a mock marriage was performed to satisfy the complainant’s mother. The complainant alleges that she was raped by Gunjan Kumar and Umesh Prasad and was ill treated by them. Apparently Saraswati Kumari has also filed a case before the Women’s Cell with respect to the same allegations as in the complaint case in the year 2008. It is somewhat more strange and surprising that the complainant had come out with some contradictory story regarding her relationship with Gunjan kumar and these petitioners. As such it becomes difficult to believe the version of the complainant set up after two years of the earlier case filed by her. In the earlier version she has been accepted that she was married whereas in the present version she has completely changed her stand and declared that she is the minor and forced into a relationship by these petitioners. I find that the entire case is unbelievable and appears to be motivated for some reason or the other. In the circumstances, I quash the order dated 22.8.2007 taking cognizance under Sections 420, 386, 376 and 366A of the Indian Penal Code in Complaint Case No. 300C of 2007 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Begusarai as far as it concerns the petitioners. This application is thus, allowed. Sanjay ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)