Allowed

Tarun Verma Nad 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Oct 2021A482/7568/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings for matrimonial disputes (IPC Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 and D.P. Act Sections 3/4). The court allowed the quashing based on a settlement agreement, mutual resolution between parties, and settled legal principles.

What did the court decide?

Charge sheet dated 19.09.2017, order dated 01.09.2018, and entire proceedings of Case No. 3555 of 2017 were set aside.

Tarun Verma Nad 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7568 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Tarun Verma Nad 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed praying for quashing of charge sheet dated 19.09.2017 and order dated 01.09.2018 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 3555 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No. 11 of 2017, under Sections- 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- T.P. Nagar, District- Meerut.

¶7

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.

¶8

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.

¶9

He further submits, at present, it seems that the opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press charge against the applicants as there is no one present on her behalf even though according to office report dated 15.9.2021 notice has been personally served.

¶10

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 settlement agreement dated 24.02.2018, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶11

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

¶12

Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another ), the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby set aside.

¶13

The present application is accordingly allowed .

¶14

Order Date :- 25.10.2021 shiv

Tarun Verma Nad 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tarun Verma Nad 4 Others 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

Brajesh Chaturvedi and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abrar Ali and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Gurmeet Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Nazreen Khatoon Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shankar Lal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajendra @ Subhash Vs State of U.P.and Another