Jharkhand High Court
Ajay Choudhary vs The State Of Jharkhand on 1 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 65 of 2021
Ajay Choudhary, aged about 31 years, son of Ajit Choudhary, resident
of Dihi Medanmolla, P.O. Dakshin Gobindpur, P.S. Baruipur, District-
South 24 Parganas, Kolkata-700145 (West Bengal), at present residing
at Deema Building, Flat No.504, Mankhool Area, Dubai (U.A.E.)
... Petitioner
-Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Akshita Jha, wife of Ajay Choudhary, daughter of Sri Arun Jha, present
residing at Baba Path, Huruhuru, P.O. Hazaribagh, P.S. Sadar, District-
Hazaribagh (Jharkhand) ... Opposite Parties
With
Cr.M.P. No. 804 of 2022
1. Ajit Choudhary, aged about 51 years, son of M. Choudhary,
2. Sunila Choudhary @ Sunil Choudhary, aged about 50 years, wife of
Ajit Choudhary
3. Puspa Chowdhury @ Jha @ Pushpa Devi, aged about 26 years,
daughter of Ajit Choudhary
All are residents of Dihi Medanmolla, P.O. Dakshin Gobindpur, P.S.
Baruipur, District- South 24 Parganas, Kolkata-700145 (West Bengal)
... Petitioners
-Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Akshita Jha, wife of Ajay Choudhary, daughter of Sri Arun Jha, present
residing at Bab Path, Huruhuru, P.O. Hazaribagh, P.S. Sadar, District-
Hazaribagh (Jharkhand) ... Opposite Parties
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
-----
For the Petitioners : Mr. Abhilash Kumar, Advocate (In both cases)
Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, S.P.P. (In Cr.M.P.-804/22)
For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Awnish Shankar, Advocate (In Cr.M.P.-65/21)
-----
06/01.11.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner in
Cr.M.P. No.65 of 2021 is the husband of opposite party no.2 and the
petitioners in Cr.M.P. No.804 of 2022 are in-laws of opposite party no.2. He
submits that both the petitions may be heard together.
2. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 in Cr.M.P. No.65 of 2021
submits that he is not having any instruction in Cr.M.P. No.804 of 2022 and
he has not filed Vakalatnama in that case.
3. Office note suggests that notice upon opposite party no.2 in Cr.M.P.
No.804 of 2022 have been received by the mother of opposite party no.2.
4. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submits that the opposite
party no.2 has already appeared in Cr.M.P. No.65 of 2021. He fairly submits
that now the matrimonial dispute has been resolved and both the parties
have taken mutual divorce and pursuant to the order passed by this Court
dated 18.07.2022 in Cr.M.P. No.65 of 2021, opposite party no.2 has received
the ornaments.
5. In light of these facts, both the petitions have been heard together.
6. These petitions have been filed for quashing the entire criminal
prosecution including the FIR in connection with Hazaribagh Sadar P.S. Case
No.436/2019, registered under Section 498A/341/323/120B/313 of the
Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Hazaribagh.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter is arising
out of matrimonial dispute and now both the parties have compromised the
matter and both the parties have taken mutual divorce and decree of
divorce has been passed by the Family Court, Hazaribagh. He further
submits that as per the order passed by this Court dated 18.07.2022, the
petitioner in Cr.M.P. 65 of 2021, namely, Ajay Choudhary has come from
Dubai and the bank locker was opened and opposite party no.2 has
received the ornaments.
8. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 accepts the submissions of
the learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that opposite party no.2
does not want to proceed further.
9. It transpires that divorce has been granted and the ornament which
was the surviving dispute, that has already been received by opposite party
no.2.
10. In view of the above submissions of the learned counsel for the
parties and considering that the matter is arising out of matrimonial dispute
and now both the parties have compromised the matter and mutual divorce
has already been taken and there is no societal interest involved in the case
and to allow to continue the proceeding will amount to abuse of process of
law and also considering the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.; [(2012) 10 SCC 303]
and Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.; [(2014) 6 SCC
466], the entire criminal prosecution including the FIR in connection with
Hazaribagh Sadar P.S. Case No.436/2019, pending in the court of the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh is, hereby, set aside.
11. Accordingly, these petitions stand allowed and disposed of.
12. Interim order, if any passed by this Court, stands vacated.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Ajay/
