Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 340 (JHR)

Amit Ranjan v. State of Jharkhand

2017-02-16

RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

body2017
ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. Mahesh Tewari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State and Mr. Anand Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No. 2. 2. Since all these matters involve common question of law and fact, the same are begin disposed of by this common order. 3. In these applications, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 28.05.2015 passed in connection with Deoghar Nagar P.S. Case No. 179 of 2013 (G.R. No. 518 of 2013) by learned Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar, whereby and whereunder, cognizance has been taken for the offences punishable u/s 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and u/s 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 4. The petitioner in Cr. M.P. No. 1818 is the husband of the opposite party No. 2 and petitioners in Cr. M.P. No. 1823 of 2015 are are in-laws of the opposite party No. 2 and the petitioners in Cr. M.P. No. 1822 of 2015 are the relatives of the husband of the petitioner in Cr. M.P. No. 1818 of 2015. 5. It appears that a complaint case was initially instituted by the opposite party No. 2 making allegation that after her marriage was solemnized with the petitioner in Cr. M.P. No. 1818 of 2015 there was demand of Rs. 5 Lakhs and on account of non-fulfillment of the same, she was subjected to torture. Further allegation has been made that the accused persons had also taken away all the ornaments and personal belongings and she was driven out from her matrimonial home. The complaint case was sent to the police u/s 156(3) Cr. P.C. and accordingly Deoghar Nagar P.S. Case No. 179 of 2013. 6. At the outset it has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the matter has been compromised between both the sides and to this effect a joint compromise petition has been filed before the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Deoghar in Matrimonial (Divorce) Case No. 97 of 2016, which has been filed by the petitioner in Cr.M.P. No. 1818 of 2015 u/s13(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act and the terms and conditions of the said settlement have been fulfilled and an amount of Rs. 5 Lakhs has already been paid by the petitioner in Cr.M.P. No. 1818 of 2015. 5 Lakhs has already been paid by the petitioner in Cr.M.P. No. 1818 of 2015. It has therefore been submitted that in view of the compromise which has been entered into the continuation of the criminal proceeding against these petitioners will be an abuse of process of the Court. 7. Mr. Anand Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No. 2 has accepted the factum of compromise and referred to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 from which this fact can be borne out. It has further been submitted that as per the terms and conditions of the said compromise, a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- has been paid to the opposite party No. 2 and a cheque of Rs. 1,50,000/- drawn in her favour has been kept in the learned court below. 8. It appears from the counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party No. 2 that the matter has been compromised as it has categorically been stated that the entire amount as agreed in the compromise has been deposited by the petitioner in Cr. M.P. No. 1818 of 2015. A copy of the said joint compromise petition which has been filed in Matrimonial (Divorce) Case No. 97 of 2016, filed 13(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Deoghar, has also been brought on record in the counter affidavit to substantiate the fact of compromise. 9. Since the parties have settled the dispute and the entire amount as agreed in the compromise has been deposited by the petitioner in Cr. M.P. No. 1818 of 2015, continuation of the criminal proceeding would be an act in futility. Accordingly, this application is allowed and the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 28.05.2015 passed in connection with Deoghar Nagar P.S. Case No. 179 of 2013 (G.R. No. 518 of 2013) by learned Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar, whereby and whereunder, the cognizance has been taken for the offences punishable u/s 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and u/s 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act is hereby quashed and set aside. Order accordingly.