Allowed

Nitin Chhabra v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC28 Jan 2023CRLP/1071/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that the impugned FIR relating to matrimonial disputes is quashed on account of a compromise between parties, supported by a judgment under Section 13-B(2) of Hindu Marriage Act allowing dissolution, relying on established Apex Court principles for quashing matrimonial FIRs.

What did the court decide?

The First Information Report dated 09.09.2020 registered as Case Crime No. 459 of 2020 is hereby quashed.

Nitin Chhabra Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1071 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Nitin Chhabra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Prabodh Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ashok Kumar Giri

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶5

Supplementary afÏdavit filed today placing the certified copy of the judgement and decree dated 7.10.2022 passed in Petition under Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Shahdara, Karardooma Courts, Delhi is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Shri Arvind Prabodh Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Naushad Alam holding brief of Shri Ashok Kumar Giri, learned counsel for the informant and the learned A.G.A for the State respondents.

¶7

This writ petition has been filed praying to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 09.09.2020 registered as Case Crime No. 459 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. George Town, District Prayagraj.

¶8

At the very outset by placing the judgment dated 7.10.2022 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Shahdara, as noted above by placing paragraph-8 of the judgment it is submitted that the divorce petition was allowed on compromise and both the parties have agreed that they will file a petition for quashing the F.I.R impugned herein. Paragraph-8 of the aforesaid judgment is quoted as under:-

¶9

"Para-8

¶10

The petitioners have agreed that they will file a petition for quashing of FIR No. 459/2020 under Sections 498-A/323/504/506/34 IPC and 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act registered at police station George Town, U.P before the Hon'ble High Court of Prayagraj, U.P. and they both will cooperate with each other. On a court query, the parties have stated that they are aware that quashing of FIR is within the discretion of Hon'ble High Court".

¶11

Para-7 further reflects that a compromise has taken place. Shri Naushad Alam, holding brief of Shri Ashok Kumar Giri, learned counsel appearing for the informant admits the aforesaid fact.

¶12

It is submitted that as between the parties compromise had already taken place therefore, the impugned First Information Report dated 09.09.2020 registered as Case Crime No. 459 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. George Town, District Prayagraj is liable to be quashed.

¶13

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), J.T. 2008(9) SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of investigation and another), (2012) 10 SCC 303 (Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab), (2014) 9 SCC 653 (Yogendra Yadav and others Vs. State of Jharkhand) and also (2014) 6 SCC 466 (Narendra Singh Vs. State of Punjab) , and in view of the settlement agreement under Section 13-B(1) of Hindu Marriage Act, the First Information Report dated 09.09.2020 registered as Case Crime No. 459 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. George Town, District Prayagraj is hereby quashed.

¶14

The present petition is, accordingly, allowed .

¶15

Order Date :- 28.1.2023 Rakesh

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nitin Chhabra v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitin Chhabra v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Rajjan Mishra @ Mahendra Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Sarvesh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bharat Kumar Saini and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Gopal and Another Vs the State of U P and 3 Others

Smt. Sheela Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Irfan Khan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others