AASHA DEVI vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21104 of 2023
CNR No. BRHC010241242023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-780 Year-2022 Thana- BUXAR COMPLAINT CASE District-
Buxar
======================================================
1. AASHA DEVI Wife of Gajendra Nath @ Gajendra Tiwary R/V and P.O-
Koransarai P.S- Koransarai Dist- Buxar Pin code- 802126 Bihar
2. Gajendra Nath @ Gajendra Tiwary Son of Late Ras Bihari Tiwary R/V and
P.O- Koransarai P.S- Koransarai Dist- Buxar Pin code- 802126 Bihar
3. Raj Tiwari @ Raj Kumar Son of Gajendra Nath @ Gajendra Tiwary R/V
and P.O- Koransarai P.S- Koransarai Dist- Buxar Pin code- 802126 Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Tanushree Wife of Raj Tiwari @ Raj Kumar and Daughter of Brij Bihari
Pathak At present R/V- Siktauna P.S- Itarhi Dist - Buxar (Bihar)
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Parth Gaurav, Adv.
Mr. Subhen Sarkar, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP
For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Ranjeet Choubey, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 26-10-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
APP for the State and learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2.
2. The present application has been filed for
quashing of the order dated 17.10.2022 passed by learned
Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Buxar in connection with
Complaint Case No.780C of 2022, whereby cognizance was
taken against the petitioners under Section 498A of the Indian
Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’).

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21104 of 2023 dt.26-10-2026
2/6
3. The short facts of the case arising out of the
complaint is that accused persons, including these petitioners,
assaulted the complainant/O.P. No.2 on account of non-
fulfillment of demand of dowry and also ousted her from
matrimonial house.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted
that the present petitioners are the mother-in-law, father-in-law,
and husband of the O.P. No. 2 and they have been implicated in
the present case with false and concocted allegations. On the
basis of the complaint and the statements of inquiry witnesses,
cognizance was taken and summons were issued against the
petitioners, but there appears to be several contradictions and
inconsistencies between the narration of the facts in the
complaint and the deposition of the inquiry witnesses. It is
further submitted that the O.P. No. 2/complainant was, as a
matter of fact, residing at her matrimonial house since 2020 and
no assault or any cruel treatment was meted out to her.
5. However, in the changed circumstances, the
complainant/O.P. No. 2 having deserted her husband (petitioner
no.3), he was compelled to file a divorce case bearing Divorce
Case No.101/2022 before the Principal Judge, Family Court,
Buxar, on 19.04.2022, and the present complaint came to be

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21104 of 2023 dt.26-10-2026
3/6
filed only as a retaliation after the notices were issued in the said
divorce case.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has apprised
this Court about the subsequent development which has taken
place in the present case and upon which additional ground, he
is also seeking quashing of the impugned order, is that on
account of intervention of well-wishers, the parties have
resolved their issues between them and in pursuance of the same
an application for mutual consent divorce under Section 13B of
the Hindu Marriage Act was filed before Principal Judge,
Family Court, Buxar, bearing Matrimonial Case No. 238 of
2026.
7. By the judgment dated 09.07.2026, the marriage
between the petitioner no.3 and the O.P. No. 2 stood dissolved,
and paragraph 4 of the said judgment, a copy of which has been
,
made available to this Court and placed on record indicates that
a joint statement of both the parties was recorded separately and
after considering the same, the judgment dated 09.07.2026 and
decree dated 20.07.2026 was passed, dissolving the marriage
between the parties. On such ground of an amicable settlement
between the parties, quashing of the entire criminal proceedings,
including the order impugned dated 17.10.2022 has been prayed

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21104 of 2023 dt.26-10-2026
4/6
for by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
8. Learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 also lends
support to the factum of mutual consent divorce under Section
13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, having taken place between the
parties, and he has also asserted that he would have no objection
to the quashing of the present criminal proceedings against these
petitioners in such circumstances of an amicable settlement
leading to resolution of disputes.
9. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties
and perused the materials available on record including the
judgment and decree of divorce under Section 13B of the Hindu
Marriage Act. It would appear from the pleadings and the
documents that the complaint was filed only after filing of
divorce case by the husband of O.P. No. 2 (petitioner no.3) and
there appear to be several discrepancies between the complaint
and the statement of the inquiry witnesses.
10. In any view of the matter, what weighs with the
mind of this court is that now the parties have resolved their
issues between them by dissolving their marriage by decree of
divorce based on mutual consent. In this regard, the judgment of
Mange Ram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr. [2025 INSC
962] is being gainfully referred and paragraph no. 31 thereof is
being quoted hereunder :-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21104 of 2023 dt.26-10-2026
5/6
“31. We also refer to Gian Singh vs. State of
Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 wherein this Court
observed that where the High Court quashes a criminal
proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute
between the offender and the victim has been settled,
although the offences are not compoundable, it does so
as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings
will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case
demands that the dispute between the parties is put to
an end and peace is restored, securing the ends of
justice being the ultimate guiding factor. In this regard,
a specific reference was made to offences arising out of
matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or a
family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the
victim but the offender and the victim have settled all
disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact
that such offences have not been made compoundable.
The High Court may, within the framework of its
inherent power, quash the criminal proceeding or
criminal complaint or FIR if it is satisfied that on the
face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of
the offender being convicted and by not quashing the
criminal proceedings, justice shall be casualty and
ends of justice shall be defeated.”
11. Further, in the case of Naushey Ali vs. State of
U.P. , reported in (2025) 4 SCC 78 , there is clear-cut observation
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the cases where parties have
entered into compromise/settlement, especially arising out of
matrimonial dispute, the Courts need to be very cautious and
circumspect, especially where family members are also involved
and the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. ought
to be invoked and exercised for quashing such criminal

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21104 of 2023 dt.26-10-2026
6/6
proceedings to bring peace and harmony in the family.
12. In view of all the above mentioned facts and
circumstances and also the settled legal position, taking into
consideration the settlement having been arrived between the
parties and the marriage between the parties getting dissolved
by mutual consent divorce decree, no useful or legitimate
purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings
to continue against these petitioners, rather a peaceful quietus
must be put to the present litigation.
13. In such view of the matter, the impugned order
17.10.2022 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class,
Buxar in connection with Complaint Case No.780C of 2022 and
all criminal prosecution arising therefrom, against these
petitioners, stand quashed.
14. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.

(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Harsh/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 28.10.2026
Transmission Date 28.10.2026