Allowed

Abhinav Bhatnagr and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Dec 2019A482/4973/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench order exercising jurisdiction under S. 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings arising from a matrimonial dispute. The court found that the parties had amicably settled their differences and were living together happily. Consequently, the application for quashing was allowed to avoid wasting time.

What did the court decide?

The entire criminal proceedings of case no. 7418 of 2018 under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 406 IPC pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly are quashed.

Abhinav Bhatnagr and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4973 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Abhinav Bhatnagr And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dhyan Shanker Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dhirendra Kumar Dwivedi

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶5

The present application u/s 482 CrPC has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet and the entire proceedings of the case no. 7418 of 2018, arising out of case crime no. 118 of 2107 under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 406 IPC, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Bareilly pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶6

Heard Shri Dhyan Shanker Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Dhirendra Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as the learned AGA appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the parties have settled their disputes amicably through agreement entered into before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, the proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed in view of 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 . It is also submitted that both husband and wife are living together happily.

¶8

On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that since the dispute between the parties have been settled, the opposite party has no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the trial court is quashed. In this regard, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also referred to the report submitted by the Incharge Mediation and Conciliation Centre dated 26.7.2019.

¶9

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the entire record including the joint affidavit filed today on behalf of the parties.

¶10

In all the aforesaid cases, the Apex Court has laid down the law that criminal proceedings may be quashed even in non-compoundable 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 disputes and it is not related to a heinous offence, the proceedings may be quashed.

¶11

Since all the disputes and differences between the parties have been amicably and mutually settled and parties are living together happily, 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.

¶12

In view of the above, the application is allowed.

¶13

The entire criminal proceedings of the aforesaid case no. 7418 of 2018, arising out of case crime no. 118 of 2107 under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 406 IPC, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Bareilly pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly are quashed.

¶14

Order Date :- 17.12.2019

¶15

safi

Abhinav Bhatnagr and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhinav Bhatnagr and Another 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

Prakash Chand Goel Vs State of U.P.and Another

Keshav Kumar and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Malti Devi Vs State of U.P.and Another

Mohd. Wakar Ahmad and Another Vs State of Up and Another

Ramkrit Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Kapil Vs State of Up and Anr.