Deep Raj And 4 Ors vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 10822 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 85
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38885 of 2018
 

 
Applicant :- Deep Raj And 4 Ors
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Kapoor
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Birendra Kumar Gautam,Subedar,Vinod Kumar Maurya
 

 
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed praying for quashing of the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 35 of 2018 (State Vs. Deep Raj and Ors.) under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Varanasi pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-III, Varanasi arising out of case crime No. 94 of 2017.

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 has been lodged against the applicant no. 1 and his other family members but that no real criminal offence had actually occurred.

It is thus submitted that the present criminal prosecution has been lodged by the opposite party no. 2 owing to some misunderstanding and misgivings between the parties, with passage of time they have been able to resolve their differences and they are living together as husband and wife.

He further submits, at present, the opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press charge against the applicants.

Sri Vinod Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants. In fact, in the compromise filed by the opposite party no. 2, she has supported the contention advanced by learned counsel for the applicants.

On the basis of compromise between the parties, both husband and wife want to live separately.

In view of the fact that the husband and wife do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them and as the matter is purely of personal nature and family dispute, which has been mutually settled between the parties, in view of the compromise dated 4.4.2022, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

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 :- 22.8.2022

RPD