Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 33 (RAJ)

Pankaj Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

2015-01-06

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2015
JUDGMENT 1. - This Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for quashing the criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.543/2011 (State v. Pankaj Kumar) arising out of FIR No.231/2010 of Police Station, Bhinmal, District Jalore pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhinmal, District Jalore. It is contended that the matrimonial dispute for which the criminal complaint was lodged and the proceedings are pending against the petitioner has already been resolved between the parties and the petitioner as well as the respondent No.2 have decided to live separately. 2. It is also contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the petitioner and the respondent No.2, the Family Court, Firozabad has already allowed the application of the petitioner filed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and passed divorce decree to the petitioner on the basis of mutual compromise. 3. It is noticed that that after due investigation in connection with the allegations levelled in the FIR No.231/2010 pertaining to Police Station, Bhinmal, District Jalore, the police has filed charge-sheet against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 323 IPC, while invoking the provisions of Section 299 Cr.P.C. as the petitioner was absconding. After filing of the charge-sheet by the police, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhinmal, District Jalore has taken cognizance against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 323 IPC and has also ordered for issuance of standing arrest warrant for summoning the petitioner. The court below has also ordered for initiating the proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. against the petitioner. 4. The respondent No.2, present in person along with her counsel, identified by her counsel, has also confirmed that the matrimonial dispute between the parties has already been resolved and by their consent, the mutual divorce decree has been passed by the Family Court, Firozadab on 17.11.2014. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that since the matrimonial dispute has already been resolved, the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner are liable to be quashed and set aside. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that since the matrimonial dispute has already been resolved, the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner are liable to be quashed and set aside. Alternatively, learned counsel for the petitioner has also argued that the standing arrest warrant issued against the petitioner by the court below may be converted into bailable warrant so that the petitioner can appear before the court below and move appropriate application for terminating the criminal proceedings pending against him on the basis of mutual compromise. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the respondent No.2 have no objection if the standing arrest warrant issued against the petitioner is converted into bailable warrant. 7. In the facts and circumstance of the case and in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the impugned order passed by the court below to the extent of issuance of arrest warrant and initiation of proceedings against the petitioner under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. is set aside. The petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on or before 30.01.2015. If the petitioner appears before the trial court and furnish bail bonds to the tune of Rs. 25,000/- along with two sureities of like amount, the trial court is directed to release the petitioner on bail. 8. Consequently, this Criminal Misc. Petition is disposed of with above directions. 9. Stay petition also stands disposed of.Petition disposed of. *******