Allowed

Ashok Pachauri v. Acmm No 15 Jd Jaipur and Ors.

Rajasthan HC15 Jan 2019CRLW/33/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allowed an application to quash pending Section 498-A criminal proceedings. The court held that since the parties had amicably settled their dispute and divorced under the Hindu Marriage Act, continuing the trial was an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

The application filed by the petitioner was allowed, the offence under Section 498-A of IPC was compounded, and the pending criminal proceedings were quashed.

Ashok Pachauri Vs Acmm No 15 Jd Jaipur and Ors. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Writ No. 33/2013

¶3

Ashok Pachauri S/o Shri B.s. Sharma, Profession Service With Icici Bank Limited R/o 4 Shivam Bunglow, 444, Behind Bhopal, 200 Feet Ring Road, Ahemdabad Ashok. [email protected]

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Acmm No. 15 Jd Jaipur Metro, Jaipur

¶7

Sho, Mahila Thana East, Jaipur, Near Gandhi Girls School, Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur-302017

¶8

Mrs. Rakhi Pachauri W/o Ashok Pachauri, R/o 170/79, Pratap Nagar Sanganer, Jaipur

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahendra Gaur. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Manisha Surana.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶12

Order

¶13

15/01/2019

¶14

The matter comes up on application filed by the petitioner for early hearing and disposal of the petition in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶15

It is mentioned in the application that petitioner and respondent No.3 have moved an application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act. In the application, it was mentioned that parties would withdraw the cases, which are pending before the Court.

¶16

It is contented that vide Judgment and Order dated 12.11.2018, marriage between the parties stands dissolved under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act. It is contended that since

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CRLW-33/2013]

¶19

offence under Section 498-A of IPC is non-compoundable, it has become necessary for the parties to approach the Court for quashing the proceedings pending before the court below.

¶20

Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on “Gian

¶21

Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 303” , wherein Apex Court has held that even if the offence is noncompoundable, High Court can under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., quash the proceedings.

¶22

Counsel for the respondent No.3 (wife) has no objection to the offence being compounded. She has also not dispute the fact that parties have settled the dispute and decree of divorce have been granted in favour of the parties under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act.

¶23

I have considered the contentions.

¶24

In view of the fact that parties have amicably settled the dispute and continuation of criminal proceedings will be abuse of process of law, I deem it proper to allow the application filed by the petitioner.

¶25

Application is allowed.

¶26

The offence is compounded. The criminal proceedings which are pending before the court below are quashed and set aside. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed.

¶27

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶28

Chandan/18

Ashok Pachauri v. Acmm No 15 Jd Jaipur and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Pachauri v. Acmm No 15 Jd Jaipur and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jitendra Nath S/O Shri Anandnath, by Caste Nath Vs State of Rajasthan

Arjun Singh Dhir Vs Deepak Keswan and Anr.

Rohitash @ Rahul S/O Bane Singh @ Baniya B/C Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

Raju @ Rajendra @ Rajkumar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Sukhram S/O Laxman Bairwa B/C Bairwa Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajkumar Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.