Allowed

Manjeet Kaur and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Aug 2023CRLR/4106/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed the criminal revision petition following a compromise. The revisionists discharged the accrued liability of Rs.20 lakh as permanent alimony, and the opposite party surrendered her right to prosecute, leading to the discharge of accused persons. The impugned order rejecting the discharge application was set aside.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision is allowed; the order dated 6.10.2015 is set aside; the discharge application is allowed and the accused are discharged.

Manjeet Kaur and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:168620

¶2

Court No. - 79

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4106 of 2015 Revisionist :- Manjeet Kaur And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Manish Tiwary,Ashwini Kumar Awasthi,Manish Tripathi,Rakesh Dubey

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Rakesh Dubey, learned counsel for the revisionists, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Ram Akbal Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

¶7

This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist against the order dated 6.10.2015 passed by Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.4, Kanpur Nagar in Case No.1498 of 2012 (State Vs. Jaspreet Singh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.46 of 2009, under Sections 498-A, 323, 420, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Kanpur Nagar, by which the discharge application filed by revisionists was rejected.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionists that parties had amicably settled their dispute outside the Court and the revisionists have already paid Rs.20,00,000/- as permanent alimony to opposite party no.2 and withdrew all the cases filed against the opposite party no.2. It is further submitted that at present no case filed by the revisionist is pending against the opposite party no.2.

¶9

Learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2 does not dispute the aforesaid facts. It is submitted by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 that opposite party no.2 had already received Rs.20,00,000/- as permanent alimony from the revisionist no.3 and as such she has no grievance against the revisionist and she does not want to prosecute the revisionists in the aforesaid case.

¶10

In view of the aforesaid fact, since the parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the Court and the revisionist no.3 has already paid Rs.20,00,000/- as permanent alimony to the opposite party no.2 and opposite party no.2 does not want to prosecute the revisionists in the present case, the present criminal revision is liable to be decided in terms of compromise.

¶11

Accordingly, the present criminal revision is allowed and the order dated 6.10.2015 passed by Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.4, Kanpur Nagar in aforesaid case is hereby set-aside and consequently the discharge application moved by revisionistsaccused is allowed and the revisionists-accused are hereby discharged.

¶12

Order Date :- 21.8.2023

¶13

Kpy

¶14

Digitally signed by :- KAVLESHWAR PRASAD YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Manjeet Kaur and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjeet Kaur and 2 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinay Kumar Tripathi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Kusma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt Prachi Singhal (Corpus) and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravindra Nath Rai and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kumari Shivani (Corpus) and Another Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Ajay Awasthi Alias Ajay Kumar Awasthi Vs State of U.P. and Another