Patna High Court
AWADHESH SINGHversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The Court held that the criminal proceedings were an abuse of process and, therefore, the order of cognizance and the entire proceeding were quashed.
Summary
The petitioners, Awadhesh Singh, Vijay Kumar Singh and Mira Devi, filed an application invoking the High Court's inherent jurisdiction to quash the order of cognizance dated 29‑11‑2021 taken by a Judicial Magistrate in connection with an FIR that alleged offences under several sections of the Indian Penal Code. They contended that the FIR contained only vague, omnibus allegations, particularly lacking the essential ingredients for offences under Sections 504 and 323 IPC, and that the proceeding amounted to malicious prosecution since a related POCSO case had been filed by their daughter shortly before. The Court examined the Supreme Court’s guidelines in State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal on when criminal proceedings should be set aside to prevent abuse of process. Finding that the allegations did not prima facie disclose a cognizable offence and that the proceeding was malicious, the Court held that continuing the case would be an abuse of the legal process. Consequently, the order of cognizance and the entire criminal proceeding were quashed, and the petition was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR and its allegations prima facie disclose a cognizable offence under Sections 504 and 323 IPC.
- Whether the criminal proceeding constitutes an abuse of process or malicious prosecution warranting quash under the Court's inherent jurisdiction.
- Whether the order of cognizance dated 29‑11‑2021 should be set aside in view of the lack of specific chargeable conduct.
- Whether the principles laid down in State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal apply to the present facts.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 155(2), 156(1), 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 323, 34, 341, 379, 504, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act
Subjects
- quash
- inherent jurisdiction
- abuse of process
- malicious prosecution
- Indian Penal Code
- Section 504 IPC
- Section 323 IPC
- Section 482 CrPC
- Bhajan Lal principles
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1707 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2019 Thana- AGRER District- Rohtas
======================================================
1. Awadhesh Singh S/O Sarju Rai R/O Village- Khudhanum, Belwa, Rohtas,
P.S. Agrer, Belwan, Bihar- 802217
2. Vijay Kumar Singh S/O Awadhesh Singh R/O Village- Khudhanum, Belwa,
Rohtas, P.S. Agrer, Belwan, Bihar- 802217
3. Mira Devi @ Mira Singh W/O Vijay Kumar Singh R/O Village-
Khudhanum, Belwa, Rohtas, P.S. Agrer, Belwan, Bihar- 802217
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Vimala Devi W/O Ram Narayan Singh R/O Village Khudhanum, Belwa,
Rohtas, P.S.- Agrer, Belwan, Rohtas , Bihar- 802217
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Puneet Siddhartha, Adv.
Mr. Chandra Mohan, Adv.
Mr.Aryan Sinha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
6 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State. Despite the valid service of notice upon the
O.P. No. 2, nobody appears on behalf of the O.P. No. 2
2. The petitioners have made the following prayer in
this application :-
“That this is an application for invoking
the inherent jurisdiction of this Hon’ble
Court for quashing the order taking
cognizance against the petitioners, passed
by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1707 of 2024(6) dt.12-02-2026
2/7
Class, Sasaram vide order dated
29.11.2021 in connection with G.R. No.
1711 of 2019 arising out of Agrer P. S.
Case No. 70 of 2019. The F.I.R. was
registered under Sections 147, 148, 149,
341, 323, 379, 504 and 506 of the Indian
Penal Code. Whereas, the cognizance was
taken for the offences committed under
Sections 341, 323, 504, 506 and Section
34 of the Indian Penal Code.”
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and having gone through the respective pleadings, it is clear that
the present F.I.R. was lodged against the seven accused persons
with general and omnibus allegation. It has been submitted that
the allegation of abuse is also general in nature and from the
requirements in Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code, the
ingredients with respect to intentional insult, insult so as to give
provocation to the person insulted and the fact that the accused
must know that such provocation is breach of public peaces is
missing. This court has observed that the petitioner no. 3
happens to be a lady while the petitioner no. 1 is 85 years old
man and against whom allegation is only with respect to his
presence at the place of occurrence. The submission made on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1707 of 2024(6) dt.12-02-2026
3/7
behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the
ingredients of malicious prosecution is writ large on the face of
it as just prior to the lodging of the present F.I.R., the
petitioners’ side, the daughter of petitioner nos. 2 and 3, had in
fact lodged Agrer P.S. Case No. 69/2019 which was a case
under the POCSO Act. The submission made on behalf of the
learned counsel for the petitioners with regard to no case being
made out even on the prima facie reading as far as the offences
under Sections 323 and 341 of the I.P.C. are concerned is
supported by the fact that no specific attribution has been made
with regard to the same as far as the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 are
concerned.
4. The observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of State of Haryana and Ors. Vs. Ch. Bhajan
Lal and Ors., reported in 1992 Supp (1)SCC 335, wherein it
was observed :-
“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation
of the various relevant provisions of the
Code under Chapter XIV and of the
principles of law enunciated by this Court
in a series of decisions relating to the
exercise of the extraordinary power under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1707 of 2024(6) dt.12-02-2026
4/7
Article 226 or the inherent powers under
Section 482 of the Code which we have
extracted and reproduced above, we have
given the following categories of cases by
way of illustration wherein such power
could be exercised either to prevent abuse
of the process of any court or otherwise to
secure the ends of justice, though it may not
be possible to lay down any precise, clearly
defined and sufficiently channelised and
inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and
to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of
cases wherein such power should be
exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first
information report or the complaint, even if
they are taken at their face value and
accepted in their entirety do not prima facie
constitute any offence or make out a case
against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first
information report and other materials, if
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1707 of 2024(6) dt.12-02-2026
5/7
any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose
a cognizable offence, justifying an
investigation by police officers under
Section 156(1) of the Code except under an
order of a Magistrate within the purview of
Section 155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations
made in the FIR or complaint and the
evidence collected in support of the same
do not disclose the commission of any
offence and make out a case against the
accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not
constitute a cognizable offence but
constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no
investigation is permitted by a police officer
without an order of a Magistrate as
contemplated under Section 155(2) of the
Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR
or complaint are so absurd and inherently
improbable on the basis of which no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1707 of 2024(6) dt.12-02-2026
6/7
prudent person can ever reach a just
conclusion that there is sufficient ground
for proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar
engrafted in any of the provisions of the
Code or the concerned Act (under which a
criminal proceeding is instituted) to the
institution and continuance of the
proceedings and/or where there is a
specific provision in the Code or the
concerned Act, providing efficacious
redress for the grievance of the aggrieved
party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly
attended with mala fide and/or where the
proceeding is maliciously instituted with an
ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on
the accused and with a view to spite him due
to private and personal grudge.”
5. Considering the aforesaid judicial pronouncement
and also taking into account the present facts and circumstances
of the case, this court finds that the continuation of the criminal
proceeding would amount to abuse of the process of law
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1707 of 2024(6) dt.12-02-2026
7/7
especially for the fact that no case under Sections 504 and 323
of the I.P.C. is made out against the petitioners even the
submission as far as the point of malicious prosecution is also
available and therefore, on such ground also, the proceeding
needs to be set aside.
6. In view of the aforesaid submission, the order dated
29.11.2021 as well as the entire criminal proceedings in
connection with G.R. No. 1711 of 2019 arising out of Agrer
P. S. Case No. 70 of 2019, is, hereby, quashed as against the
petitioners.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Gautam/-
U T
Checking your session…