Saloni Soni Vs State of Chhattisgarh

2. Mahesh Soni S/o Purushottam Soni Aged About 26 Years R/o Nagar Nigam Colony, Agresen Chowk, Infront Of Desh Bandhu Press, P.S.Azad Chowk, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) (Accused)

¶11

... Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner	: Mr. Satish Surya, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Yogesh Pandey, Advocate
For State	: Mr. Satish Gupta, G. A.
For Respondent No. 2	: Mr. Trivikram Nayak, Advocate

¶13

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶14

Judgment On Board

¶15

06/09/2024

¶16

1. Petitioner/ wife has filed this petition seeking cancellation of bail granted to respondent No. 2/ husband in MCRCA No. 881/2023 vide order dated 15.09.2023.

¶17

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No. 2/ Husband has violated the terms and conditions laid down in the order passed by Mediation Centre dated 12.09.2023. He contends that bail

¶18

2 / 2

¶19

was granted to respondent No. 2 on account of the settlement entered into between the parties. He argues that there were serious allegations against respondent No. 2 regarding cruelty, harassment, demand of dowry and unnatural offences. He prays that the bail granted to respondent No. 2 may be quashed.

¶20

3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 submits that parties had already settled the dispute between them and case filed U/s 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by husband for dissolution of marriage has been withdrawn on 09.03.2024 and copy of that order-sheet has been placed on record. He argues that the bail was granted as the parties appeared before the Mediator and dispute was settled. He prays that the order dated 15.09.2023 does not warrant any interference.

¶21

4. Learned State counsel submits that there was matrimonial dispute between the parties and same has been settled.

¶22

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record.

¶23

6. Evidently, dispute between the parties was resolved and the case filed by respondent No. 2/ husband U/s 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been withdrawn on 09.03.2024. Petitioner has also not challenged the compromise arrived at between the parties before the Mediator, therefore, the bail granted earlier cannot be cancelled.

¶24

7. In view of the above-discussed facts, I do not find any good ground to interfere. Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed .

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE

¶27

Ajinkya

Saloni Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saloni Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Padamdhar Prasad Pandey Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Dr. L.N. Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dr. Pushpa Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Visa Power Limited

Girdhar Prasad Gupta Vs Gopal Prasad Gupta

Rakesh Kumar Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.