[2026:JHHC:16495] 1 Cr. M.P. No.1511 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.1511 of 2026 ------ Satya Mehta, aged about 39 years, D/O Chetlal Prasad Mahtha, Resident of Village Mangura, P.O.- Kariyatpur, P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribag (Jharkhand) … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Awnish Shankar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, Addl.P.P. ------ P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties. 2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated 11.10.2021 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh in connection with Lohsinghna P.S. Case No. 97 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 2023 of 2021 whereby and where under the learned court below has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code inter alia against the petitioner and issued summons against him. 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is having illicit relationship with the husband of the informant and was bent upon killing the informant so that she can marry the husband of the informant. [2026:JHHC:16495] 2 Cr. M.P. No.1511 of 2026 4. On the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, police registered Lohsinghna P.S. Case No. 97 of 2020 and took up investigation of the case. After completion of the investigation, police submitted charge sheet inter alia against the petitioner for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and basing upon the same, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh has taken cognizance of the said offences; as already indicated above. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of U. Suvetha vs. State by Inspector of Police & Another passed in Criminal Appeal No. 938 of 2009 dated 06th May, 2009, para-18 of which reads as under:- “18. By no stretch of imagination a girl friend or even a concubine in an etymological sense would be a ‘relative’. The word ‘relative’ brings within its purview a status. Such a status must be conferred either by blood or marriage or adoption. If no marriage has taken place, the question of one being relative of another would not arise.” (Emphasis supplied) and submits that therein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has categorically stated that by no stretch of imagination, a girl friend or even a concubine in an etymological sense would be a ‘relative’. It is next submitted that since the petitioner admittedly is only having illicit relationship with the husband of the informant, by no stretch of imagination, the petitioner can be termed to be a relative of the husband of the informant and in the absence of the same, the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is not made out against the petitioner. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed for in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition be allowed. [2026:JHHC:16495] 3 Cr. M.P. No.1511 of 2026 6. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner made in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition but fairly submits that the petitioner cannot be said to be a relative of the husband of the informant in view of the only allegation that she is having illicit relationship with the husband of the informant. 7. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that the essential ingredients to constitute the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code are as under:- (i) A woman was married; (ii) She was subjected to cruelty; (iii) Such cruelty consisted in:- (a) Any willful conduct as was likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical); (b) Harass to such woman with a view to coercing her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand; (c) A woman was subjected to such cruelty either by her husband or any relative of her husband. So, it is crystal clear that a person can only be alleged to have committed the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, if and only if, such person is either the husband or a relative of the husband of the woman who was subjected to cruelty. [2026:JHHC:16495] 4 Cr. M.P. No.1511 of 2026 8. Now coming to the facts of the case, admittedly the petitioner is only having illicit relationship with the husband of the informant. So, in the considered opinion of this Court, in view of the settled principle of law as discussed above, the petitioner cannot be the relative of the husband of the informant and in the absence of the same; even if the entire allegations made against the petitioner are considered to be true in their entirety, still the offence punishable under Section 498A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out against the petitioner. Therefore, the continuation of the criminal proceeding against the petitioner will amount to abuse of process of law. Hence, this is a fit case where the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated 11.10.2021 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh in connection with Lohsinghna P.S. Case No. 97 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 2023 of 2021 be quashed and set aside qua the petitioner named above only. 9. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated 11.10.2021 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh in connection with Lohsinghna P.S. Case No. 97 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 2023 of 2021, is quashed and set aside qua the petitioner named above only. 10. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 09th of June, 2026 AFR/ Saroj Uploaded on 10/06/2026