Rohit Singh vs State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 134 Jhar

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                              Cr.M.P No. 3234 of 2017
      1. Rohit Singh
      2. Dr. Ram Naresh Singh
      3. Shobha Singh
      4. Nikhil Prasoon                                  .... .... Petitioner(s).
                                    Versus
      1. State of Jharkhand
      2. Garima Rajlaxmi                                 .... .... Opposite Party(s)
                                    ------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.

THROUGH : VIDEO CONFERENCING

------

FOR THE PETITIONER(S) : Mr. Naveen Kr. Jaiswal, Advocate FOR THE STATE : Mr. Nehru Mahto, APP FOR THE O.P No.2 : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, APP

------

05/11.01.2021 The lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding, which has been held through video conference today at 11.00 A.M. They have no complaint in respect to the audio and video clarity and quality.

2. By filing this application, petitioners have prayed to quash the entire criminal proceeding arising out Jagannathpur P.S. Case No. 181 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 3046 of 2016 registered under Sections 498(A)/34 IPC and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. Counsel for the petitioners submits that dispute is matrimonial in nature and both the parties have already resolved their dispute. He submits that matter was referred to Mediation Centre, JHALSA, Ranchi wherein parties have decided to settle their dispute. He submits that as per terms of settlement, the entire agreed amount has been paid to the wife. Further he submits that divorce has already been granted by appropriate court pursuant to the said settlement. He submits that only criminal case is pending and in view of the settlement arrived between the parties this case needs to be quashed. He refers to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.S. Joshi & Ors. Vrs. State of Haryana & Anr. reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675.

4. Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2- wife admits that parties have resolved their disputes and he has got no objection if the entire proceeding is quashed.

5. Heard the Counsel for the parties.

6. This case is registered under Section 498(A)/34 IPC and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The dispute arose out of matrimonial relationship. On request, this case was referred to mediation centre JHALSA, Ranchi. The mediator has submitted a report which is dated 01.07.2017 wherein it has been mentioned that parties have arrived at settlement and the mediation is successful. As per submission of both the parties, divorce has already been granted and amount of compensation/ one time alimony has already been paid. Further I find from the argument of the counsel for the opposite party no.2 that opposite party no.2 has got no objection if the entire criminal proceeding is quashed.

7. Considering the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.S. Joshi & Ors. (Supra), I am inclined to exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C and quash the criminal proceeding arising out of Jagannathpur P.S. Case No. 181 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 3046 of 2016.

8. Accordingly, the instant application stands allowed.

(ANANDA SEN , J) anjali/ C.P 3