Allahabad High Court
Aman Dua And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 12 March, 2021
Bench: Vivek Varma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 79
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19088 of 2020
Applicant :- Aman Dua And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rizwan Ahamad
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anurag Vajpeyi,Manu Srivastava
Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
Heard Sri Rizwan Ahamad, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Anurag Vajpeyi, learned counsel appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2 and Sri Nikhil Chaturvedi, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 4255 of 2019 (State Vs. Sherin and another), summoning order dated 20.09.2019 as well as charge sheet dated 2.6.2019 in Case Crime No. 1118 of 2017, under Section 406 IPC Police Station Sector-49, District Gautam Gudh Nagar, pending in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Gautam Budh Nagar.
It is submitted that the applicant no.1 is the husband and applicant no.2 is the brother-in-law (devar) of opposite party no.2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present dispute arises out of matrimonial discord between the applicant no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2. The present criminal case had been lodged against the applicant no. 1 and his family members but that neither there was any criminal intent on the part of any party nor any criminal offence had actually occurred.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that:-
(i) the only dispute between the parties were purely civil and private in nature, arising out of matrimonial discord between the parties;
(ii) the FIR came to be lodged by the opposite party no. 2 owing to misunderstanding and misgivings between the parties and not on account of any real occurrence as alleged;
(iii) there never was any criminal intent on part of the applicants nor any criminal offence as alleged had ever occurred;
(iv) there is no injury caused to any party and wholly exaggerated allegations had been made in the heat of the moment owing to estranged relationship and bruised egos;
(v) at present, the parties have resolved their differences such that the parties are living together in matrimony;
(vi) therefore, in the changed circumstance, the opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press charges against the present applicants.
It is also stated that compromise deed dated 01.10.2020 had been filed by the parties before the learned court below. Certified copy of the same is annexed as Annexure-4 to the affidavit in support of the present application. It further appears that the learned court below has verified the aforesaid compromise vide order dated 15.02.2021.
In fact, it is submitted that if the criminal prosecution is allowed to proceed it may create further complication in the otherwise normal relationship that is arising between the hitherto estranged couple and their families;
Sri Anuraj Vajpeyi, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants.
In view of the fact that the dispute appears to be purely of a personal nature being matrimonial discord that has been mutually settled between the parties, to their entire satisfaction, no useful purpose would be served in allowing the prosecution to continue any longer.
Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana) as well as the Judgment of the Apex Court reported in J.T., 2008(9) SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another), the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby set aside.
The present application is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 12.3.2021
Lbm/-
