Patna High Court
KUMAR VIVEK @ KUMAR VIVEK RAIversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The High Court quashed the criminal proceedings because the parties had settled the dispute and the informant consented to the quashment.
Summary
The petitioner, Kumar Vivek, was charged under IPC sections 323, 307, 498A, 34 and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for alleged dowry demands, cruelty, and an attempted murder of his wife, Namrata Kumari. The FIR alleged that the bride's family was forced to pay a car and Rs. 11 lakh as dowry, and that the petitioner attempted to kill the informant by pressing a pillow over her face. The parties later settled the dispute amicably, and the informant expressed no objection to the quashing of the case. The petitioner filed an application seeking to quash the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 30.08.2017. The High Court, noting the settlement and the informant's consent, allowed the application and quashed the proceedings. Consequently, the earlier order and all related proceedings were set aside.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings under IPC 323, 307, 498A, 34 and the Dowry Prohibition Act can be quashed on the basis of an amicable settlement between the parties.
- Whether the consent of the complainant (informant) is sufficient to extinguish criminal liability in dowry harassment and attempted murder cases.
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — s. 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 34, 498A
Subjects
- dowry harassment
- criminal procedure
- quashment of criminal proceedings
- settlement
- attempted murder
- IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67795 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-509 Year-2016 Thana- BETTIAH CITY District- West
Champaran
======================================================
Kumar Vivek @ Kumar Vivek Rai Son Of Baleshwar Rai Resident Of
Village-Saint Joseph School Road In Front Of Kidzee School Mohalla-
Dargah, Ward No.22, P.S-Town Bettiah, District-West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Namrata Kumari Daughter of Shiv Bachan Prasad Singh Resident of
Village-Dak Bunglow Road, P.S-Nagar Bettiah, District-West Champaran.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashank Chandra, Advocate
Mr. Nitish Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Rajendra Nath Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Rina Sinha, APP
Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ritesh Kashyup, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 27-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and the learned counsel for the informant.
2. This application has been filed for quashing the
order dated 30.08.2017 passed by the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran in Bettiah Town P.S. Case
No. 509 of 2016 by which the Court below took cognizance
against the petitioner and others under Section 323, 307,
498(A)/34 of the IPC and Section ¾ of the DP Act.
3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information
Report (FIR), is that Opposite Party No. 2 (the informant) was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67795 of 2019(3) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
married to the petitioner on 19.11.2013 according to Hindu
customs. During the marriage settlement, the in-laws allegedly
demanded a car and Rs. 11 lakh in cash as dowry. It is further
alleged that the bride’s family was pressured with the condition
that the Baraatis (marriage party) would not be allowed to attend
the marriage unless the dowry demand was fulfilled. On
15.03.2013, the father of the informant deposited Rs. 2,50,000
in his account, and on 15.11.2013, the bride’s family allegedly
handed over a Wagon-R Maruti car to the in-laws after taking a
loan. It is further claimed that Rs. 8,50,000 had already been
paid prior to this. It is further alleged that the petitioner, who
runs a hostel for 30 students, made the informant work as a
maidservant to perform all household duties. The prosecution
further alleges that the petitioner put pressure on Opposite Party
No. 2 to get a house, located in Muzaffarpur, registered in her
name. Upon her refusal, the accused subjected her to cruelty and
torture and tried to kill the informant by pressing a pillow over
her face. Upon hearing her screams, local people arrived at the
scene and saved her life and informant returned to her parental
home (Maike).
4. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that
the parties have settled the dispute amicably, and the informant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67795 of 2019(3) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
(Opposite Party No. 2) has no objection to the quashing of the
present case as the matter has been resolved between the parties.
5. Considering the settlement between the parties, this
application is allowed.
6. Accordingly, the order dated 30.08.2017 passed by
the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran,
in Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 509 of 2016, and all the
proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR are hereby quashed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…