Allowed

Smt. Ekta Srivastava Adn 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC23 Oct 2019A482/37721/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this quashing application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Single Judge quashed criminal proceedings pending against the applicant and opposite party no. 2, who are husband and wife, holding the dispute settled amicably and of a personal nature as per well-settled precedents.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in Complaint Case No. 2859 of 2017 involving sections 323, 504, and 506 IPC were set aside.

Smt. Ekta Srivastava Adn 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37721 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Ekta Srivastava Adn 2 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

¶5

Sri Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of O.P. No. 2 and joint affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant no. 1 and O.P. No. 2. Let these documents be taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding as well as summoning order dated 7.1.2019 passed by A.C.J.M., Court No. 7, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 2859 of 2017 (Prashant Srivastava Vs. Ekata Srivastava & others) under section 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Indirapuram, District Ghaziabad pending in the court of IInd Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Ghaziabad.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants and O.P. No. 2 submitted that applicant no. 1 and O.P. No. 2 are wife and husband. This is matrimonial dispute and the same has been settled in between the parties and on the basis of mutual consent applicant no. 1 and O.P. No. 2 have also filed a petition under section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act which is pending and in that case a demand draft of Rs. 6 lacs has been given to the applicant no. 1 by O.P. No. 2. The matter is of personal nature. It is further contended that the matter has been compromised between the parties and joint affidavit has been filed today. It is thus contended that the dispute has been settled between the parties. Learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State, (2008) 16 SCC1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand (2014) and has submitted that since the matter has been compromised between the parties amicably, hence no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution of the applicants in the present case is allowed to go on as no grievance is left to the O.P. No. 2, therefore, the present case be finally decided.

¶9

Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 also states that the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and that

¶10

the opposite party no. 2 does not want to proceed further with the matter.

¶11

In view of the fact that the husband and wife do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them and as the matter is purely of personal nature and family dispute, which has been mutually settled between the parties, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶12

Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, Manoj Sharma Vs. State, (2008) 16 SCC1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014), Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, J.T., 2008(9) SC 192 the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby set aside.

¶13

The present application is accordingly allowed.

¶14

Order Date :- 23.10.2019 Masarrat

Smt. Ekta Srivastava Adn 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Ekta Srivastava Adn 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

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

Gangesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Ram Kishan and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Pramod Kumar and Another Vs State of Up and Another

Rajveer Vs State of Up and Another

Om Prakash and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamlesh Singh and 4 Others Vs State of Up and Anr.