Patna High Court
Abdul QuyumversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The High Court found no ground to interfere with the order refusing cognizance and dismissed the petition.
Summary
The petitioner Abdul Quyum sought to quash an order dated 04-10-2024 of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bettiah, which had taken cognizance of a murder case (Sessions Case No. 242 of 2023) under Sections 319(1)(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, but had not summoned the brother‑in‑law and sister‑in‑law of the deceased as accused. The underlying facts involve the death of Sabnam Khatoon, allegedly strangulated by her husband’s relatives after dowry demands were not met, and the informant’s report to police. The petitioner argued that there were sufficient grounds to summon the two relatives as accused, while the opposite parties contended that the FIR named them but the investigation cleared them, and the magistrate’s order not to take cognizance was never challenged. After hearing counsel and reviewing the records, the Patna High Court held that there was no ground to interfere with the lower court’s order. Consequently, the petition for quashing the order was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the order of the Additional District and Sessions Judge refusing to take cognizance against the brother‑in‑law and sister‑in‑law can be quashed.
- Whether there are sufficient grounds to summon the said persons as accused under Sections 319(1)(2) CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 319(1)(2)
Subjects
- Criminal Procedure Code
- cognizance
- quash order
- dowry death
- murder
- investigation
- accused
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16785 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-552 Year-2022 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Abdul Quyum Son of Late Shekh Chokat @ Late Shekh Sarif village-
Khairatiya Baladiha, Ward no. 06, Siswa Bhuinhar, Ps- Nawalpur, Dist- West
Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shikh Rizwan Son of Late Sheikh kalam village- Pokhariya Rai, Ps-
chanpatiya, Dist- West Chamaparan
3. Asmin Khatoon Wife of Late Seikh Kalam village- Pokhariya Rai, Ps-
chanpatiya, Dist- West Chamaparan
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, APP
For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Avinash Raj, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 10-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the opposite parties.
2. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order
taking cognizance dated 04.10.2024 passed by the learned
Additional District and Sessions Judge-V, Bettiah, West
Champaran, in connection with Sessions Case No. 242 of 2023
(arising out of Chanpatia P.S. Case No. 552 of 2022) for the
offences under Sections 319(1)(2) of the Cr. P.C., whereby the
petition of informant/petitioner has been rejected for
summoning the opposite parties as an accused.
3. As per the prosecution case, the marriage of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16785 of 2025(2) dt.10-04-2026
2/3
informant’s/petitioner’s daughter, namely Sabnam Khatoon, was
solemnized with one Sheikh Arman in the year 2022 as per
Muslim rites and customs. After a few months, all the accused
persons started torturing her mentally and physically due to non-
fulfilment of dowry demands. On 23.10.2022, the informant
received information that Asmin Khatoon (sister-in-law of the
deceased), Sheikh Rizwan (brother-in-law of the deceased),
Shahjahan Khatoon (mother-in-law of the deceased), including
Sheikh Arman (husband of the deceased), had strangulated his
daughter to death under a conspiracy. Upon hearing this, the
informant, along with his family members, reached the
matrimonial home of the deceased, where he found that they
were trying to conceal the dead body. When he objected,
accused Shahjahan Khatoon began arguing with the informant.
Consequently, the informant immediately reported the matter to
the local police station, Chanpatia, after which the police
arrived at the crime scene and took custody of the dead body.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that there are sufficient grounds to summon O.P. Nos. 2 and 3,
who are the brother-in-law and sisters-in-law of the deceased.
5. Learned counsel for the opposite parties has
submitted that O.P. Nos. 2 and 3 were named in the FIR;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16785 of 2025(2) dt.10-04-2026
3/3
however, after a thorough investigation, the allegations were not
found to be true against them, and the findings of the
investigation were accepted by the learned Magistrate.
Accordingly, no cognizance was taken against them. Moreover,
the order by which the learned Magistrate did not take
cognizance against the O.P. Nos. 2 and 3, was never challenged.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon
perusal of the records, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the
impugned order dated 04.10.2024. Accordingly, the present
application is dismissed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Jyoti/-
U T
Checking your session…