1. Heard the parties.

2. Though the opposite party No.2 has put in her appearance through a lawyer but no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party No.2 in spite of repeated calls.

3. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the First Information Report in connection with Mandu (West Bokaro O.P.) P.S. Case No.145 of 2020 registered under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act of the court of A.C.J.M., Ramgarh.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the investigation of the case is still going on and charge-sheet has not yet been submitted in this case.

5. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners being the husband and relatives of the husband of the informant, treated the informant with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry and also demanded dowry.

6. Drawing attention of this Court towards the copy of the certified copy of the complaint filed by the informant against the petitioner Nos.1 to 3, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the informant has filed Complaint Case No.613 of 2019 for the self-same allegation which has been made in the present F.I.R. and drawing attention of this Court towards the order dated 10.06.2020 passed in Cr.M.P. No.975 of 2020, learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that since a co-ordinate Bench of this Court stayed the further proceedings in connection with the said case, hence, suppressing the material fact that for the self-same allegation, a complaint has already been instituted; without clean hands, this case has been instituted. It is then submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is further submitted that the informant has suppressed the filing of earlier case. Therefore, it is submitted that since the informant has not approached the court with clean hands, hence, the conduct of the informant amounts to abuse of process of law. It is also submitted that even if the entire allegations made against the petitioners are considered to be true in their entirety still none of the offence is made out against the petitioners. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer of the petitioners, as prayed for in the instant Cr.M.P., be allowed.

7. Learned Addl. P. P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioners made in the instant Cr.M.P. and submits that the allegations made are sufficient to constitute each of the offences in respect of which the F.I.R. has been registered. Hence, at this nascent stage, the entire criminal proceedings ought not be quashed. It is lastly submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed.

8. 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 this Court in the case of Ajay Sagar @ Ajay Prem Sagar & Another vs. The State of Jharkhand & Another passed in Cr.M.P. No.3781 of 2022 dated 28th June, 2023, relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Krishna Lal Chawla & Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another reported in (2021) 5 SCC 435 paragraphs-13 and 26 of which read as under:-

                  “13. It is also crucial to note that in the fresh complaint case instituted by him, Respondent 2 seems to have deliberately suppressed the material fact that a charge-sheet was already filed in relation to the same incident, against him and his wife, pursuant to NCR No. 160 of 2012 (Crime No. 283 of 2017) filed by Appellant 1's son. No reference to this charge- sheet is found in the private complaint, or in the statements under Section 200 CrPC filed by Respondent 2 and his wife. In fact, both the private complaint and the statement filed on behalf of his wife, merely state that the police officials have informed them that investigation is ongoing pursuant to their NCR No. 158 of 2012. The wife's statement additionally even states that no action has been taken so far by the police. It is the litigant's bounden duty to make a full and true disclosure of facts. It is a matter of trite law, and yet bears repetition, that suppression of material facts before a court amounts to abuse of the process of the court, and shall be dealt with a heavy hand (Ram Dhan v. State of U.P. [Ram Dhan v. State of U.P., (2012) 5 SCC 536 : (2012) 3 SCC (Cri) 237] ; K.D. Sharma v. SAIL [K.D. Sharma v. SAIL, (2008) 12 SCC 481] ).

                  26. It is a settled canon of law that this Court has inherent powers to prevent the abuse of its own processes, that this Court shall not suffer a litigant utilising the institution of justice for unjust means. Thus, it would be only proper for this Court to deny any relief to a litigant who attempts to pollute the stream of justice by coming to it with his unclean hands. Similarly, a litigant pursuing frivolous and vexatious proceedings cannot claim unlimited right upon court time and public money to achieve his ends.” (Emphasis supplied)

                  wherein it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that it is the litigant's bounden duty to make a full and true disclosure of facts. It is a matter of trite law and yet bears repetition that suppression of material facts before a court amount to the abuse of the process of the court and shall be dealt with a heavy hand.

9. In that case, this Court also relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Kapil Agarwal & Others vs. Sanjay Sharma & Others reported in (2021) 5 SCC 524, para-20 and 21 of which reads as under:-

                  “20. Under the circumstances, the impugned FIR is nothing but an abuse of process of law and can be said to be filed with a view to harass the appellants.

                  21. We are not expressing anything on merits whether, any case is made out against the appellants for the offences alleged in the Section 156(3) CrPC application as the same is pending before the learned Magistrate and the learned Magistrate is to take call on the same. Therefore, when the impugned FIR is nothing but an abuse of process of law and to harass the appellant-accused, we are of the opinion that the High Court ought to have exercised the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India/Section 482 CrPC and ought to have quashed the impugned FIR to secure the ends of justice.”

                  Wherein as the impugned F.I.R was nothing but an abuse of process of law and to harass the accused the same was instituted, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India was of the opinion that the High Court ought to have exercised the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India/Section 482 CrPC and ought to have quashed the impugned FIR to secure the ends of justice.

10. Now, coming to the facts of this case; the undisputed fact remains that much prior to lodging of this F.I.R. on 03.08.2020 for the self-same allegation made against the petitioners, the informant filed Complaint Case No.613 of 2019 in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh and the said case is still pending but suppressing this material fact with the sole intention of utilising the institution of justice for unjust means, the informant has lodged the said F.I.R. to materially improve her earlier version in totality and such suppression of the material fact amounts to abuse of process of law and this F.I.R. has been filed only to harass the petitioners with multiple criminal prosecutions for the same set of occurrence, for the purpose of wreaking vengeance. Hence, in the considered opinion of this Court the continuation of this criminal proceeding against the petitioners, named above, will amount to abuse of process of law, therefore, it is a fit case where the entire criminal proceeding including the First Information Report in connection with Mandu (West Bokaro O.P.) P.S. Case No.145 of 2020, be quashed and set aside qua the petitioners named above.

11. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding including the First Information Report in connection with Mandu (West Bokaro O.P.) P.S. Case No.145 of 2020, is quashed and set aside qua the petitioners named above.

12. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed.