Allowed

Varun Saxena v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2023A482/22572/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court quashed the charge sheet and criminal proceedings against the applicant arising from a matrimonial dispute. The matrimonial discord was resolved with parties living separately and a compromise was reached involving payment of Rs. 8 Lakhs.

What did the court decide?

The charge sheet dated 10.5.2016 and proceedings of Criminal Case No. 758 of 2018 are quashed insofar as it relates to the applicant.

Varun Saxena Vs State of U.P. and Another — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22572 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Varun Saxena Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bhupesh Pathak,Surya Bhan Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Surya Bhan Dubey learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and Sri Virendra Jaiswal learned counsel holding brief of Sri Umesh Kumar learned counsel appearing for opposite party No.2.

¶6

Present application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 10.5.2016 and the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 758 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 638 of 2013, under Sections 498A, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Hafijganj, District Bareilly, Pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Bareilly.

¶7

At the outset, learned counsel for applicant states, present prosecution had emerged from a matrimonial discord between the parties. That dispute has been resolved such that the parties have parted company and are living separately. They are seeking to dissolve their marriage. A written compromise is stated to have been reached between them. Thereunder the applicant is stated to have paid to the opposite party No.2 Rs. 8 Lakhs. The said amount has been deposited in the court of Principal Judge Family Court, Bareilly in Case No. 758 of 2018. It is to be paid out to the opposite party No. 2 upon dissolution of the marriage.

¶8

The above submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicants has been confirmed by the learned counsel appearing for opposite party No.2.

¶9

In such circumstances, though no useful purpose would be served in allowing the prosecution to continue any further, however, no firm conclusion may be reached, at this stage, as to complete falsity of the allegations made against the applicants. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application thus stands allowed .

¶10

The charge sheet dated 10.5.2016 and the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 758 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 638 of 2013, under Sections 498A, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Hafijganj, District Bareilly, Pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Bareilly are quashed insofar as it relates to applicant.

¶11

Order Date :- 16.1.2023 Faraz

¶12

Digitally signed by :- FARAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Varun Saxena v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varun Saxena 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manzar Ali Vs State of U.P. and Another

Umashankar Tripathi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Surya Prakash Vs State of U.P. and Anothers

Raj Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Afroj and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shami Ulla and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another