Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 441 (UTT)

PRASHANT KUMAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2015-09-10

SUDHANSHU DHULIA

body2015
JUDGMENT : Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. A complaint was moved under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.c. by the respondent No. 2 – Ms. Rashmi before the court of Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar and on the basis of the said complaint, the First Information Report was lodged under Section 498-A/542/323/506 of I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. Subsequently, the case was registered as Criminal Case No. 1907 of 2012 under the aforesaid sections, which is pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. The police after investigating the case has submitted the chargesheet against the present applicants under the aforesaid sections. Consequently, the learned Magistrate took cognizance against the present applicants. Hence the applicants preferred present application invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 2. The present applicant No. 1 – Prashant Kumar is the husband of the complainant/respondent No. 2- Ms. Rashmi and applicant No. 2 – Laxmi Narain and applicant No. 3 – Ms. Rajni are the father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively of the complainant. The marriage of applicant No. 1 – Prashant Kumar and respondent No. 2 – Ms. Rashmi was solemnized on 07.12.2011 and there is no child out of this wedlock. This Court vide order dated 25.04.2013 passed following order:- “It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the husband surrendered before the Court below and was granted bail. The applicant no. 1 is the husband, applicant no. 2 is father-in-law and applicant no. 3 is mother-in-law of the respondent no. 2. It is provided as an interim measure that court below shall not insist upon the personal appearance of the applicants/petitioners no. 2 & 3, till the next date of listing of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.” 3. Now at this stage, applicant No. 1 – Prashant Kumar, who is represented by Mr. Abhishek Verma and respondent No. 2 – Ms. Rashmi, who is represented by Mr. Nikhil Singhal, Advocate, moved a joint compounding application along with their affidavits before this Court stating therein that since during the pendency of this criminal case both the parties have arrived at into settlement, therefore, they want to resolve their dispute amicably and the complainant wants to withdraw her case lodged by her against the present applicants. 4. Nikhil Singhal, Advocate, moved a joint compounding application along with their affidavits before this Court stating therein that since during the pendency of this criminal case both the parties have arrived at into settlement, therefore, they want to resolve their dispute amicably and the complainant wants to withdraw her case lodged by her against the present applicants. 4. The applicant No. 1 – Praskaht Kumar and the complainant/respondent No. 2 – Ms. Rashmi are present in the Court today, who have been identified by their counsels. They have stated before the Court that they have mutually filed a suit under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act in the court of Judge, Family Court, Camp Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar on 21.04.2015. The wife – Ms. Rashmi, who is present in person before the Court further submits that she does not want to prosecute her husband and his family members further in the matrimonial case. Learned counsel for the applicants further relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab & another reported on 2012 (10) SCC 303 . 5. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab & another reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 wherein the correctness of the earlier decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court in Nikhil Merchant [ 2008 (9) SCC 677 ] and B.S. Joshi [ 2003 (4) SCC 675 ] have been reiterated and in the considered view of this Court that the present case is a fit case to invoke inherent power of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., as no fruitful purpose will be solved to keep the criminal proceeding in the court below pending, as the proceedings before the court below are primarily private in nature. 6. In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, and particularly, considering the above decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court, the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1907 of 2012 under Sections 498-A/542/323/506 of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar are hereby quashed. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed.