Rattan Chand vs The State Of Himachal Pradesh And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 5734 HP

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA




                                                                              .
                                                        CrMMO No. 367 of 2023





                                                        Decided on :           12.05.2023





    Rattan Chand                                                          ...Petitioner

                                             Versus

    The State of Himachal Pradesh and another                             ...Respondents


    Coram                 r                 to
    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.

    Whether approved for reporting?1



    For the petitioner:                 Mr. Suneet Goel, Advocate.



    For the respondents:                Ms. Sharmila Patial, Additional
                                        Advocate General, with Mr. Arsh
                                        Rattan and Ms. Ayushi Negi, Deputy




                                        Advocates General, for respondent No.
                                        1.





                                        Mr. Vishwas Kaushal, Advocate, for
                                        respondent No. 2.





    Virender Singh, Judge. (Oral)

Petitioner-Rattan Chand has filed the present

petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

(hereinafter referred to as 'CrPC'), for quashing FIR No. 129 of

2018, dated 3rd November, 2018, registered under Sections

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

323, 324, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter

referred to as the 'IPC'), with Police Station Nadaun, District

.

Hamirpur, H.P., as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto,

pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Nadaun, District Hamirpur (hereinafter referred

to as the learned 'trial Court').

2. According to the petitioner, the FIR, as mentioned

above, has been registered, at the instance of respondent No.

2, who is his wife. After the registration of the FIR, the

criminal machinery swung into motion. After the completion

of the investigation, charge-sheet in the above-said case has

been filed, under Sections 323, 324, 504 and 506 IPC, before

the learned trial Court, which is pending adjudication, for

consideration on charge and is fixed for 9th May, 2023.

3. As per the petitioner, since, the petitioner and

respondent No. 2 are husband and wife, as such, with the

intervention of the relatives and friends, both of them have

settled the matter amicably.

4. In view of the settlement between the parties,

respondent No. 2 is stated to be ready to withdraw the

complaint and subsequent proceedings thereto.

5. Re-asserting the fact that the petitioner and

respondent No. 2 are now residing happily in the matrimonial

.

home and the settlement has been arrived at by them in order

to maintain their cordial relations, a prayer has been made to

accept the petition.

6. When put on notice, respondent No. 2 has not

opted to contest the petition, whereas, respondent No. 1-State

has contested the petition, by filing the reply, in which, the

factual position, about the manner, in which the FIR has been

registered and the investigation has been conducted by the

police, has been reasserted.

7. It has also been admitted that after the

investigation, the police filed the charge sheet, under Section

173 (2) CrPC, for the commission of the offence, under Sections

323, 324, 504 and 506 IPC.

8. Today, the petitioner, as well as his wife, i.e.

respondent No. 2, appeared before this Court. The

complainant, i.e. respondent No. 2 (wife), has stated that the

petitioner is her husband and she has registered FIR No. 129

of 2018 against him. Now, with the intervention of the

respectables of the families, the dispute has been resolved

between them and they are interested to reside jointly in the

matrimonial home. She has again stated that after the

.

settlement, both of them are residing jointly in the

matrimonial home and, as such, she has prayed that the FIR

in question may be quashed.

9. Similar type of statement has been made by the

petitioner, with a prayer to quash the FIR and the proceedings

resultant thereto.

10. It seems that the FIR in question has been lodged

by respondent No. 2, out of the matrimonial discord, which has

now been settled between the parties. In such situation, it is a

fit case where the powers of the Court, under Section 482

CrPC, are liable to be invoked, as the main endeavour of the

Court is to protect the institution of marriage.

11. When the complainant, as well as, the accused,

who are respondent No. 2 and the petitioner before this Court,

are interested to live together in the matrimonial home,

rather, living together in the matrimonial home, then,

permitting to continue the criminal proceedings, definitely,

would cause prejudice to their relations.

12. Moreover, the chances of success of the prosecution

case are not so bright, as such, the prayer made in the petition

.

is liable to be accepted. The acceptance of the petition would

not only save the matrimonial ties between the petitioner and

respondent No. 2, rather, it will save the precious judicial time

of the learned trial Court, which could be utilized for the

decision of some other serious matter.

13. Considering all these facts, the petition is allowed

and FIR No. 129 of 2018, dated 3rd November, 2018, registered

under Sections 323, 324, 504 and 506 IPC, with Police Station

Nadaun, District Hamirpur, H.P., as well as, the proceedings

resultant thereto, pending in the learned trial Court, are

ordered to be quashed.

14. The statements of the parties, made today, in the

Court, shall form part of the judgment.

15. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall

also stand disposed of accordingly.

( Virender Singh ) Judge May 12, 2023 ( rajni )