The High Court quashed criminal proceedings initiated under Sections 498-A IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, citing an amicable settlement where the opposite party had settled with the applicants and expressed no objection to quashing the charges.
Entire criminal proceedings against the applicants under Section 482 Cr.P.C. were quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 46
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38054 of 2018
Applicant :- Ganga Dulari And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Om Prakash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.
Shri Vinod Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has filed a counter affidavit which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants,learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and the learned AGA for the State and also perused the record.
By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the applicants have invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the criminal proceeding initiated pursuant to the charge sheet dated 3.7.2008 (State Vs. Ganga Dulari & others) whereupon cognizance has been taken against the applicants in Case No.3797 of 2008 arising out of case crime no.126 of 2008, under Section 498-A IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Kotwali City, District Mirzapur as well as bailable warrant dated 7.1.2016 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are the mother-in-law, father-in-law, jeth and devars of the opposite party no.2. It is further submitted that the opposite party no.2 has entered into amicable settlement with the applicants as she does not want to prosecute them further. In support of his contention he has filed compromise deed as entered into between the parties which has been annexed as Annexure-5 of the application.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has contended that both the parties have no grievance whatsoever against each other, therefore, this application may be decided in terms of the settlement between them.
The learned A. G. A. has no objection with regard to the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants and gone through the record.
Since the opposite party no.2 has entered into amicable settlement with the applicant and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no.2 has stated that she has no objection in case the criminal proceeding against the applicant is quashed, therefore, in view of the decision of Hon'ble the Apex Court in B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana & others , (2003) 4 SCC 675 , no useful purpose would be served by keeping the criminal prosecution alive, as chances of ultimate conviction is bleak.
In the light of above conspectus taking into account the special facts of the case to give quietus to the dispute entire proceeding against the applicants is hereby quashed.
Accordingly, the application is allowed.
Order Date :- 26.10.2018 M. Tariq
1 issue framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings under Sections 498-A IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act should be quashed in light of an amicable settlement between parties.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana & othersFollowed¶12
(2003) 4 SCC 675 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ganga Dulari And 4 Others
Naheed Ara Moonis
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
