Allowed

Smt.Ankita Awasthi v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2019A482/37477/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the court quashed criminal proceedings following a Section 406 IPC complaint. The applicant, after a divorce, submitted that the dispute was settled and continuation of the case would be an abuse of process. Agreeing that it was a private matrimonial dispute amenable to quashing, the High Court allowed the application.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed; the entire proceedings of Complaint Case no. 370 of 2015 and the summoning order dated 02.09.2015 are quashed.

Smt.Ankita Awasthi Vs State of U.P.and Another — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37477 of 2016

¶3

Applicant :- Smt.Ankita Awasthi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the state.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case no. 370 of 2015 (Ajeet Pandey Vs. Smt. Ankita Awasthi and others) as well as summoning order dated 02.09.2015 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. VII, Agra, under Section 406 IPC, P.S. New Agra, District- Agra pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. IX, Agra.

¶7

Referring to the second supplementary affidavit filed in this matter, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that both the parties have settled the dispute before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre. Terms and conditions entered into between the parties have also been fulfilled. Marriage between the parties has already been dissolved through divorce decree, as is clear from the annexure no. 3 of the second supplementary affidavit.

¶8

It is also submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that it is a private family dispute between the parties and all the disputes and differences have been settled between the parties. At this stage, learned counsel further submitted that continuation of the proceedings of the aforesaid case will be an abuse of process of law. No fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicant has also placed reliance on the law laid down by Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012), 10 SCC 303, B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675 and Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582.

¶9

On the other hand, learned AGA submits that since the dispute between the parties has been settled and has no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case pending before the trial court is quashed.

¶10

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record.

¶11

In all the aforesaid cases, the Apex Court has laid down the law that criminal proceedings may be quashed even in noncompoundable cases by the High Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction to restore peace between the parties and in case the justice so demands. According to Hon'ble Supreme Court, if the offence involve private dispute between the parties of commercial nature or matrimonial dispute and it is not related to heinous offence, the proceedings may be quashed.

¶12

Since the dispute between the parties has been amicably and mutually settled, no fruitful purpose would be served by permitting to continue the criminal case pending before the trial court and it would simply be a waste of time if the aforesaid case is permitted to continue till its logical conclusion.

¶13

In view of the above, the Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

¶14

The entire proceedings of Complaint Case no. 370 of 2015 (Ajeet Pandey Vs. Smt. Ankita Awasthi and others) as well as summoning order dated 02.09.2015 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. VII, Agra, under Section 406 IPC, P.S. New Agra, District- Agra pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. IX, Agra against the applicant are quashed in terms of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶15

Order Date :- 16.7.2019 Sanjeet

Smt.Ankita Awasthi v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Ankita Awasthi v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yatendra @ Pintoo and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sahab Lal and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashraf and 03 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Mukesh Kumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anil Gupta and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Km. Mamta Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Anr.