Luxmi Prakash Rathor vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 9079 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 83
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2116 of 2021
 

 
Applicant :- Luxmi Prakash Rathor
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhanshu Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
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 entire proceeding of Case No. 76 of 2018 arising out of impugned charge sheet against the preset applicant under section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and section 3/4 D.P Act arising out of case crime no. 363 of 2017, P.S. Baradari, District Bareilly pending in the court of A.C.J.M, Bareilly (State Vs. Luxmi Rathore and others.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present dispute arises out of matrimonial discord between the applicant and the opposite party no. 2. The present criminal case has been lodged against the applicant 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 Sanjay Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant. In fact, in the compromise filed by the opposite party no. 2, she has supported the contention advanced by learned counsel for the applicants.

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 9.10.2020, 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 :- 3.8.2022

RPD