Patna High Court
TARKESHWAR SINGH AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The complaint was held to be mala‑fide and the cognizance dated 23‑05‑2018 was quashed.
Summary
The petitioners – the father, mother and brothers of the complainant – sought quashing of the cognizance taken by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya, in a complaint alleging assault, robbery and criminal intimidation under IPC sections 323, 341, 504 and 379. The complainant, a tempo driver, claimed the accused assaulted him and his wife and stole jewellery and money. The petitioners contended that the complaint was filed maliciously to intimidate them, describing the complainant as a habitual offender and alcoholic. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, the High Court examined whether the prosecution was mala‑fide and an abuse of process. Finding the allegations to be mala‑fide, the Court quashed the cognizance dated 23‑05‑2018 and all consequent proceedings. The application for quashing was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the complaint filed by the complainant is mala‑fide and constitutes an abuse of the judicial process
- Whether the cognizance taken by the Chief Judicial Magistrate should be quashed under the principles laid down in Bhajan Lal
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 379, 504
Subjects
- mala fide prosecution
- abuse of process
- quash of cognizance
- IPC sections 323, 341, 504, 379
- Bhajan Lal test
- criminal law
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13116 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1319 Year-2014 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Gaya
======================================================
1. Tarkeshwar Singh S/O Late Sudama Singh Resident Of Mohalla Chand
Choura, Police Station Bishunpad, District- Gaya
2. Abhishek Kumar @ Bittu S/O Tarkeshwar Singh Resident Of Mohalla
Chand Choura Police Station Bishunpad, District-Gaya
3. Prabha Devi W/o Tarkeshwar Singh Resident Of Mohalla Chand Choura
Police Station Bishunpad, District-Gaya
4. Akash Kumar @ Bithal S/O Tarkeshwar Singh Resident Of Mohalla Chand
Choura Police Station Bishunpad, District-Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Rajesh Kumar Tarkeshwar Singh Resident Of Mohalla Chand Choura Police
Station Bishnupad District-Gaya
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary, APP
Mr. Mrigendra Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ramashish, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 20-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the
learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the O.P.
No. 2.
2. This application has been filed for quashing of the
cognizance dated 23.05.2018 passed by the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in Complaint Case No. 1319 of 2014
by which cognizance was taken under sections 323 341, 504 and
379 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners on the basis
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13116 of 2019(4) dt.20-01-2026
2/6
of the complaint petition filed by the complainant namely
Rajesh Kumar.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the
complainant, a Tempo driver, has purchased a Tempo on loan
under the Prime Minister Rural Self-Employment Scheme. He
earns his livelihood and supports his family by operating the
Tempo. The complainant alleges that on 26.07.2014, at around
7:30 in the morning, he received a call from his wife. She was
crying and weeping, informing him that all the accused persons
were beating her and falsely accusing her of having poured
poison into the water. Upon hearing this, the complainant rushed
home, where he found all the accused persons assaulting his
wife. When the complainant tried to intervene and save his wife,
the accused persons, leaving her behind, caught hold of him and
pushed him to the ground. When the complainant fell down on
the ground, the petitioner nos. 2 and 4 assaulted him with a lathi
near the eye. The complainant managed to protect his eye, and
at that moment, petitioner no. 1 snatched the gold Jitia from the
complainant's wife, while petitioner no. 3 took Rs. 259 from the
complainant. The complainant sustained severe injuries. It is
further alleged that, after the incident, he went to the Civil Lines
Police Station, from where he was sent to Pilgrim Hospital.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13116 of 2019(4) dt.20-01-2026
3/6
However, due to the seriousness of his injuries, the complainant
was referred to Magadh Medical College Hospital, where he
was admitted and remained from 26.07.2014 to 01.08.2014. The
complainant further alleges that on 02.08.2014, he gave a
written complaint at the Civil Lines Police Station, where the
Station House Officer visited the complainant's residence for an
inquiry but did not take any action. On 03.08.2014, at around
6:30 in the evening, all the accused persons suddenly arrived at
the complainant's residence and assaulted him, stating that the
police would not take any action against them. The complainant
later filed a complaint before the Court of the Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Gaya.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
after registration of the Complaint Case No. 1319 of 2014, the
complainant was examined on S.A. and the witnesses were
examined. He further submits that the petitioner no.1 is the
father of the complainant, petitioner no. 3 is the mother and
petitioner no.2 and 4 are the brothers of the complainant. The
complainant is a man of criminal bent of mind and has four
criminal cases pending in the Court. The petitioner no.1 is an
old man retired from the Government services and is bearing the
educational expenses of both his sons who are studying in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13116 of 2019(4) dt.20-01-2026
4/6
Delhi.
5. It is further submitted that the complainant is an
unemployed individual who is unable to support his family and
is known to be an alcoholic. On occasions when he is unable to
procure alcohol, he causes disturbances within the household.
The petitioners are deeply aggrieved by the complainant’s
disruptive and rude behavior. On 26.07.2014, the complainant
demanded money from petitioner no. 1 to purchase alcohol,
which was denied and in response to this, the complainant
slapped petitioner no. 1, his father, which was objected by his
wife. The complainant further slapped the wife of the petitioner
no. 1, and this incident was subsequently reported to petitioners
no. 2 and 4 by petitioner no. 3. At that time, petitioners no. 2
and 4 were at their college in Delhi. After coming to know about
the situation, they advised their mother to lodge an FIR against
the complainant. The complainant, in retaliation, has filed the
present complaint with a mala-fide intention to intimidate the
petitioners.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners has further
submitted that the present complaint has been maliciously filed
against the petitioners with an intention to intimidate them.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioners has relied
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13116 of 2019(4) dt.20-01-2026
5/6
upon a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in the
case of State of Haryana & Ors v. Bhajan Lal & Ors, 1992
Supp (1) SCC 335 and has submitted that the present
prosecution is a mala-fide one and the same is nothing but an
abuse of the process of the court.
8. Per-contra, the learned APP for the State and the
learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 opposed the application of the
petitioners.
9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhajan
Lal (Supra) has held that mala-fide prosecution should not be
allowed to continue.
10. On careful examination of the materials available
on record, this Court finds that the allegations against the
petitioners are mala-fide and the complaint has been filed by the
complainant against his parents and his brothers to wreck
vengeance.
11. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of Bhajan Lal (supra), the application stands
allowed.
12. Accordingly, the cognizance dated 23.05.2018
passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Gaya in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13116 of 2019(4) dt.20-01-2026
6/6
Complaint Case No. 1319 of 2014 and all the consequential
proceedings arising out of the aforesaid complaint case are
hereby quashed.
13. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.