Jharkhand High Court
Rudra Rohit Mallick @ Roudra Rohit ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 19 October, 2022
1 Cr.M.P. No. 01 of 2022
With
Cr.M.P. No. 3565 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 01 of 2022
Rudra Rohit Mallick @ Roudra Rohit Mallick, age 39 years, son of Sri
Debi Das Mallick, resident of Sarkar Billa, 37, Burdwan Compound, P.O.
& P.S. Lalpur, Town & District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) ... Petitioner
-Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Rohini Das Mallick, wife of Roudra Rohit Mallick @ Rudra Rohit Mallick,
daughter of P.K. Das, resident of C/17, Netaji Nagar, Kantatoli, P.O. &
P.S. Lower Bazar, Town & District- Ranchi (Jharkhand)
... Opposite Parties
With
Cr.M.P. No. 3565 of 2022
1. Debi Das Mallick, aged 65 years, son of Late B.B. Mallick
2. Chandana Mallick, aged 64 years, wife of Sri Debi Das Mallick
Both residents of Sarkar Billa, 37, Burdwan Compound, P.O. & P.S.
Lalpur, Town & District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) ... Petitioner
-Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Rohini Das Mallick, wife of Roudra Rohit Mallick, daughter of P.K. Das,
resident of C/17, Netaji Nagar, Kantatoli, P.O. & P.S. Lower Bazar, Town
& District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) ... Opposite Parties
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
-----
For the Petitioners : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, Advocate (In both cases)
For the State : Mr. P.D. Agrawal, S.P.P. (In Cr.M.P.-01/2022)
Mr. V.K. Vashistha, S.P.P. (In Cr.M.P.-3565/2022)
For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Rahul Kumar Das, Advocate (In both cases)
-----
06/19.10.2022. Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, learned counsel for the petitioners,
Mr. P.D. Agrawal and Mr. V.K. Vashistha, learned counsel for the State and
Mr. Rahul Kumar Das, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.
2. In both the cases, common complaint case, framing of charge and
order taking cognizance are involved and that is why both the petitions have
been heard together with consent of the parties.
3. In Cr.M.P. No.01 of 2022, the petitioner is the husband of opposite
party no.2 and in Cr.M.P. No.3565 of 2022, petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are
father-in-law and mother-in-law of opposite party no.2 respectively.
With
Cr.M.P. No. 3565 of 2022
4. These petitions have been filed for quashing the entire criminal
proceedings in connection with S.T. No.557/2019 arising out of Complaint
Case No.1234 of 2015 including the cognizance order dated 04.03.2016 and
order framing charge dated 21.03.2022, pending in the court of the learned
Additional Judicial Commissioner-XV at Ranchi.
5. Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the matters are arising out of matrimonial dispute and the case has been
registered under Section 498A and other sections of the Indian Penal Code
and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He further submits that both
the parties have compromised the matter and they have filed a petition
under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for mutual divorce
being Original Suit No.232/2015 and decree of divorce in the said suit has
already been granted and in that view of the matter joint compromise
petitions in the form of I.A. No.9679 of 2022 in Cr.M.P. No.01 of 2022 and
I.A. No.9680 of 2022 in Cr.M.P. No.3565 of 2022 have been filed.
6. Mr. Rahul Kumar Das, learned counsel appearing 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 in the
matter as decree of divorce has been granted with mutual consent.
7. Mr. P.D. Agrawal and Mr. V.K. Vashistha, learned counsel for the State
submit that it is an admitted fact that divorce has taken place and for that
the said I.As. have been filed.
8. In view of the above submissions of the learned counsel appearing for
the parties and considering that the cases are arising out of matrimonial
dispute and both the parties have obtained decree of divorce and joint
With
Cr.M.P. No. 3565 of 2022
compromise petition in the form of I.A. No.9679 of 2022 in Cr.M.P. No.01 of
2022 and I.A. No.9680 of 2022 in Cr.M.P. No.3565 of 2022 have been filed
and they have settled the dispute and also considering that there is no
societal interest involved in these petitions 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
proceedings in connection with S.T. No.557/2019 arising out of Complaint
Case No.1234 of 2015 including the cognizance order dated 04.03.2016 and
order framing charge dated 21.03.2022, pending in the court of the learned
Additional Judicial Commissioner-XV at Ranchi are, hereby, quashed.
9. Accordingly, these petitions stand allowed and disposed of.
10. Consequently, I.A. No.9679 of 2022 and I.A. No.9680 of 2022 stand
disposed of.
11. Interim order, if any granted by this Court, stands vacated.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Ajay/
