Allowed

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

Allahabad HC16 Aug 2022/2843/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed applications seeking quashing of criminal proceedings under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, and 506 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. Given the post-nuptial compromise, payment of one-time alimony, and divorce decree, the court quashed the proceedings, citing Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Both applications allowed and entire criminal proceedings under Case No.4661 of 2016 arising from Crime No.46 of 2016 deleted/ quashed.

Smt. Geeta Awasthi Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2843 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Geeta Awasthi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sarvesh Kumar Pandey,Arjun Kumar Kaushal Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate

¶4

connected with

¶5

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8023 of 2017

¶6

Applicant :- Diwakar Awasthi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Sarvesh Kumar Pandey,Arjun Kumar Kaushal Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Jitendra Bahadur,Munni Lal Yadav

¶7

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶9

Both the petitions have been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No.4661 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No.46 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 IPC and Section ¾ Dowry prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Kheri, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ist, Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶10

The parties have entered into compromise on 10.5.2019 and a copy of the compromise has been placed on record along with supplementary affidavit dated 20.4.2021 filed in the connected case as Annexure No.SA-2. One time alimony of Rs.7,50,000/has been agreed to be paid by the petitioner-husband to opposite party no.2, wife.

¶11

On the basis of the said compromise, the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the wife for maintenance has been disposed of vide order dated 10.5.2019. The said order has also been placed on record along with the supplementary affidavit (Annexure-SA-3).

¶12

On the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties, the divorce petition filed under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act has also been allowed by the Family Court vide order dated 21.1.2022. The aforesaid order notes that opposite party no.2 has received one time alimony for Rs.7,50,000/-. The petition filed under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act has also been disposed of in terms of compromise. In the compromise, it is also mentioned that the parties will take steps for quashing of the present proceedings also.

¶13

In view of the aforesaid facts and also taking into the consideration the various orders passed by the different courts in different proceedings filed by the parties, and the decree of divorce and one time alimony of Rs.7,50,000/- paid to the wife, it would be appropriate to quash the criminal proceedings as continuance of the proceedings in pursuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility in view of the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of B.S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and another :(2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1, Gian Singh versus Station of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6 SCC 466,

¶14

Accordingly, both the petitions are allowed and entire proceedings of Case No.4661 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No.46 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 IPC and Section ¾ Dowry prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Kheri, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ist, Lakhimpur Kheri, are hereby quashed.

¶15

Order Date :- 16.8.2022 Rao/-

¶16

Digitally signed by CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO Date: 2022.08.16 18:14:38 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Geeta 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Raj Verma Vs State of U.P.and 3 Ors.

Abdul Kalam Vs the State of U.P.and 9 Ors.

Habib Ahmad Vs State of U.P.and Anothers.

Vivek Prakash and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home. Lko and Another

Sandeep Kumar and Anothers Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and Anothers

Abdul Rauf Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home