Patna High Court
Raj Kumari @ Raj Kumari DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that, in view of the amicable settlement and the settled law, continuation of the criminal proceedings would not be in the interest of justice and therefore quashed the FIR and charge‑sheet.
Summary
The petitioners sought quashing of FIR No.81 of 2024 and charge‑sheet No.80 of 2025 filed under Section 64 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, alleging that the complainant was induced into a physical relationship under a false promise of marriage and dowry demand. The complainant and the accused later entered into a marriage and filed a joint compromise petition, claiming the dispute was amicably settled and further prosecution would damage their reputation. The petitioners relied on Supreme Court judgments permitting quash of non‑compoundable offences in the interest of justice when parties have settled. The Court examined the settled position of law and the facts, concluding that continuation of the criminal proceedings would not serve the interest of justice. Consequently, the Court quashed the FIR, charge‑sheet and all related criminal proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings for offences under Section 64 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act can be quashed on the ground of a mutual compromise despite being non‑compoundable.
- Whether the interest of justice permits the court to quash an FIR and charge‑sheet after a settlement between the parties.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 64
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- quash of FIR
- compromise settlement
- non‑compoundable offence
- dowry prohibition
- interest of justice
- Section 64 B.N.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80457 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Patna
======================================================
1. Raj Kumari @ Raj Kumari Devi wife of Sri Bikau Bhagat Resident of
Village- Mukhiypatti, Ward No. 4, P.S.- Saharghat, Distt.- Madhubani
2. Bikau Bhagat Son of Palat Bhagat Resident of Village- Mukhiypatti, Ward
No. 4, P.S.- Saharghat, Distt.- Madhubani
3. Samarjeet Bhagat Son of Sri Bikau Bhagat Resident of Village- Mukhiypatti,
Ward No. 4, P.S.- Saharghat, Distt.- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Priyanka Kumari D/O- Sri Sahanand Prasad Resident of S.P. Griham
Apartment, Flat No. C/401, Ashiyana Digha Rad, Ramnagari Turning, P.S.-
Rajiv Nagar, Distt.- Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Singh, APP
Mr. Kamal Kishore Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Digvijay Kumar Ojha , Advocate
Mr. Akshay Kumar , Advocate
Mr. Savitesh Kumar , Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 18-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
counsel for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party
no. 2.
2. The present application has been filed for quashing
of FIR bearing Mahila P.S. Case No. 81 of 2024, registered for
the offences under Section 64 of the B.N.S. and also under
Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Through I.A. No.
01 of 2026, a prayer has been made to quash the charge-sheet
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80457 of 2024(3) dt.18-06-2026
2/4
no.80 of 2025 dated 31.05.2025 filed in the present case after
the conclusion of investigation.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant,
Priyanka Devi, submitted a written report before the Officer-in-
Charge, Mahila Police Station, Gardanibagh, Patna, alleging that
her engagement with the petitioner no. 3, Samarjeet Bhagat was
performed on 18.11.2022 at A.V.R. Hotel, Patna in the presence
of relatives and friends. It is alleged that thereafter the accused
induced her to develop physical relation on false assurance of
marriage. It is further alleged that on different occasions,
including at Patna and Bangalore, she was subjected to sexual
intercourse under the pretext of marriage and was subsequently
threatened not to disclose the same. Allegations of demand of
dowry of Rs. 35 lakhs have also been levelled against co-
accused persons.
4. Today, the matter was taken for hearing. The
learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel
for the opposite party no. 2 has drawn attention of this Court to
joint compromise petition filed by the parties. It has been
submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise
without any coercion, threat or promise and the allegation was
primarily with respect to entering into physical relationship on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80457 of 2024(3) dt.18-06-2026
3/4
the false pretext of marriage. Learned counsel for the parties
have submitted that petitioner no. 3,namely, Samarjeet Bhagat
and O.P. No. 2 have been married and they are living peacefully
with their respective spouses. It has further been submitted that
if the prosecution is allowed to continue, the image of the
parties in the society would be tarnished and there might be
turmoil in their respective matrimonial relationships.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed
reliance on a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the
case of Amol Bhagwan Nehul v/s State of Maharashtra & Anr
reported as 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1230 as well as the another
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Naim
Ahamed V/s State (NCT of Delhi) reported in 2023 SCC
OnLine SC 89 and has submitted that even at the stage of FIR
and even if the offence being non-compoundable one, in the
interest of justice, the same can be quashed.
6. Heard the submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and perused the materials on record including the
compromise petition. It appears that the dispute between the
parties has been amicably settled.
7. In view of the settled position of law laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court and considering the totality of facts
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80457 of 2024(3) dt.18-06-2026
4/4
and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that
continuation of the criminal proceedings would now not be in
the interest of justice.
8. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceedings arising
out of Mahila P.S. Case No. 81 of 2024, including Charge Sheet
No. 80 of 2025 dated 31.05.2025, are hereby quashed.
9. The application stands allowed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Jyoti/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.