IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9385 of 2007 RAMESH KUMAR & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 8 1.9.2008 Heard Sri Chakardhari Sharan Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioners as also Sri Narendra Kumar, the learned counsel for O.P. No. 2 and Sri Jharkhandi Upadhaya, learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioners, 11 in number, all of whom have been impleaded as accused in Complaint Case No. 230 of 2006 have prayed for the quashing of the order dated 5.1.2007 passed therein by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, whereby he has taken cognizance under section 498A I.P.C. against the petitioners. One Kalawati Devi, the complainant and wife of petitioner no. 1, Ramesh Kumar, impleaded herein as O.P.No. 2, filed aforesaid complaint on 30.3.2006 inter alia stating that his marriage with Ramesh Kumar was solemnized on 16.6.2005 whereat gifts worth Rs. one lac were given to the accused persons. It is alleged that on entry into the matrimonial home all the accused persons appeared to be displeased with the gifts given and they started taunting her that notwithstanding being the only daughter of the parents she had not been able to bring even a motorcycle. It is further alleged that the accused persons started pressurizing her to bring a “Pulsar” motorcycle and Rs. 50,000/- in cash from her father and this she informed to her father and other relatives when she returned to the parental home after a month. It is said that during her stay in the - 2 - Naihar her husband came visiting and inquired from her when the motorcycle and cash could be made available whereupon she expressed the inability of her father to meet the demand in view of his financial crunches. It is alleged that on hearing the same the husband went away in a huff living her in the Naiher with a warning that she will remain there until the demand was made. Efforts by the father and relatives of the complainant were made to pacify the matter and they requested the accused to let the complainant stay in her sasural. It is alleged that on going back to the matrimonial home she was again subjected to abuse and further torture, both mentally and physically, due to non fulfillment of the demands and eventually on 15.9.2005 all the accused persons having obtained her signature by force on some blank paper ousted her from matrimonial home. Efforts of her father to pacify matter proved useless. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the complainant never wished or desired to stay in the matrimonial home in view of her illicit relationship with one Bir Paswan of Aurangabad and notwithstanding the best efforts of the accused she refused to stay and having no other alternative but to accept her willingness and an affidavit was sworn by the complainant on 28.9.2005 to the effect that she did not want to stay with petitioner no. 1. It has further been submitted that the allegation of the complainant being subjected to cruelty had not been made out nor had it been proved that any motorcycle or money had been demanded and as such according to the petitioners no offence under section 498A I.P.C. could be said to - 3 - have been made out against any of the petitioners. It was also submitted that no specific allegations had been made out against any of the petitioners and there was no specific mention of any of the petitioners having made the demand nor is there any specific accusation of their having committed any overt act so as to cause torture or cruelty upon the complainant. I have perused the complaint petition and the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate. I am of the opinion that whereas there is direct allegation against the husband of making demand, the allegations and accusations against the rest of the accused are omnibus and general in nature and from the same they cannot be summoned to face trial. In the result the application is allowed in part and the cognizance taken so far as the petitioner nos. 2 to 11 are concerned is hereby quashed. However, the trial court will be at liberty to proceed against the husband Ramesh Kumar. Spd/- (Abhijit Sinha, J.)