This judgment allows an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings initiated from a matrimonial discord, relying on a valid compromise and the principles set in B.S. Joshi and Nikhil Merchant cases.
The proceedings of the criminal case No. 665 of 2018 are set aside.
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. - 83
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4522 of 2019
Applicant :- Brajesh Chaturvedi And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Singh,Deepak Kumar Patel,Digvijay Singh,Pramod Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Supplementary affidavit, filed by learned counsel for the applicants, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for O.P. No.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed praying for quashing of charge sheet No. 106 of 2018 dated 5.9.2018 as well as entire criminal proceeding of criminal Case No. 665 of 2018 (State vs. Brajesh Chaturvedi and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 90 of 2018, u/s 323, 498-a, 504, 506, 420 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.- Mahila Thana, District Agra, pending before the A.C.J.M.-10th, Agra.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present dispute arises out of matrimonial discord between the applicant no.1 and the opposite party no. 2. The present criminal case has been lodged against the applicant no.1 and his other family members but that no real criminal offence had actually occurred.
It is thus submitted that the present criminal prosecution has been lodged by the opposite party no. 2 owing to some misunderstanding and misgivings between the parties, with passage of time they have been able to resolve their differences and they have entered in a compromise which has been verified by the court below. He further submits, at present, the opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press charge against the applicants.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants. In fact, in the supplementary affidavit, filed by the applicants, supports the contention advanced by learned counsel for the applicants.
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, in view of the
compromise, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.
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) as well as the Judgment of the Apex Court reported in J.T., 2008(9) SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another ), the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby set aside.
The present application is accordingly allowed .
Order Date :- 5.10.2021 Vandana
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a matrimonial dispute that has been mutually settled warrants the quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B.S. Joshi Vs. State of HaryanaApplied¶13
2003(4) SCC 675 · Who else cites this
Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherReferred¶13
J.T., 2008(9) SC 192 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Brajesh Chaturvedi and 6 Others
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
