The Court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 498-A IPC and related provisions based on a compromise. The dispute stemmed from matrimonial discord, which the parties reportedly resolved and are living together, making further prosecution unnecessary.
Proceedings of Case No. 76 of 2018 arising out of the charge sheet were 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. - 2116 of 2021
Applicant :- Luxmi Prakash Rathor Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhanshu Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed praying for quashing of entire proceeding of Case No. 76 of 2018 arising out of impugned charge sheet against the preset applicant under section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and section 3/4 D.P Act arising out of case crime no. 363 of 2017, P.S. Baradari, District Bareilly pending in the court of A.C.J.M, Bareilly (State Vs. Luxmi Rathore and others.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present dispute arises out of matrimonial discord between the applicant and the opposite party no. 2. The present criminal case has been lodged against the applicant 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 are living together as husband and wife.
He further submits, at present, the opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press charge against the applicants.
Sri Sanjay Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant. In fact, in the compromise filed by the opposite party no. 2, she has supported 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 dated 9.10.2020, 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 :- 3.8.2022 RPD
Digitally signed by RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI Date: 2022.08.06 15:27:30 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings under Section 498-A IPC should be quashed upon a compromise between the parties in a matrimonial dispute.
Whether the mutual settlement and reconciliation between the husband and wife warrant the quashing of the entire criminal case.
Luxmi Prakash Rathor
State of U.P.
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
