Allowed

Surendra Kumar v. State of Raj and Ors.

Rajasthan HC4 Jan 2021CRLMP/1401/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order quashed criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in a matrimonial dispute involving Section 498-A and 406 IPC. The court held that continuing prosecution served no fruitful purpose after a binding compromise between the parties.

What did the court decide?

The criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner in FIR No.74/2018 registered at Mahila Police Station, Kota City are hereby quashed.

Surendra Kumar Vs State of Raj and Ors. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1401/2018

¶3

Surendra Kumar S/o Late Shri Rati Ram, R/o 1-Y-16, Dada Badi, Kota.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan Through PP.

¶7

The Inspector General Of Police, Government Of Rajasthan, Kota Range, Kota.

¶8

The Superintendent Of Police, Kota.

¶9

The Sho, Mahila Police Station Kota City.

¶10

Smt. Kamlesh Meena W/o Surendra Kumar Meena, R/o Plot No.13, New Gopal Vihar Police Station Borkheda, Police Station Police Lines, Kota City.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashvin Garg through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. Takhat Singh through VC Mr. Ramesh Choudhary, P.P. for State

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR SHARMA

¶14

Order

¶15

04/01/2021

¶16

The Petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.74/2018 registered at Mahila Police Station, Kota City for offence under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC on the basis of compromise entered between the parties.

¶17

Heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the material made available on record.

¶18

As per factual report submitted by learned Public Prosecutor offence under Section 498-A IPC has been found to be proved in

¶19

(2 of 2)

¶20

[CRLMP-1401/2018]

¶21

the investigation against accused Surendra Kumar, who is husband of the respondent-complainant.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that compromise has taken place between the parties. Being family dispute and in view of peaceful settlement between the husband and wife, the criminal proceedings in this case deserve to be quashed.

¶23

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that appropriate order may be passed in the matter.

¶24

It is well settled legal position as expounded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan [(2019) 5 SCC 688] that the criminal proceedings can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the basis of compromise in matrimonial or family disputes.

¶25

Thus, in view of compromise in matrimonial dispute-inquestion, no fruitful purpose would serve in continuing with the prosecution. Therefore, to meet the ends of justice the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner deserve to be quashed. 8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner in FIR No.74/2018 registered at Mahila Police Station, Kota City are hereby quashed.

¶26

(SATISH KUMAR SHARMA),J

¶27

Sahil/Simple Kumawat /19

Surendra Kumar v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Kumar v. State of Raj 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

Mateen Ahmad S/O Shri Umar Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Dharmchand S/O Shri Bhanwru Vs State of Rajasthan

Dharam Raj S/O Mohan Lal Khatik Vs State of Rajasthan

Mangu Khanwani S/O Shri Chelaram Khanwani Vs State of Rajasthan

Novax Communication Priv.Lmtd. Vs State of Rajasthan

Novax Communication Priv.Lmtd. Vs State of Rajasthan