Kailash Kumar Rajwar @ Kailash ... vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 3597 Jhar

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             Cr.M.P. No. 2631 of 2021
                  Kailash Kumar Rajwar @ Kailash Kumar, S/o Sri Bhikshankar Rajwar,
                  age about 34 years, resident of Village Chakulia (Ramdih), P.O.
                  Kashijharia, P.S. Pindrajora, Dist.- Bokaro, Jharkhand
                                                                      ... Petitioner
                                           -Versus-
             1.   The State of Jharkhand
             2.   Kumari Gayatri Rajwar, W/o Kailash Kumar Rajwar @ Kailash Kumar,
                  age about 24 years, D/o Sri Rajiv Kumar Rajwar, R/o as per FIR, Vill.-
                  Chakulia, Ramdih, P.O. Kashijharia, presently residing at Village
                  Ashanbani, P.O. Chandra, P.S. Siyaljori, Dist.- Bokaro, Jharkhand
                                                                     ... Opposite Parties
                                             -----

             CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
                                             -----

             For the Petitioner              : Mr. Md. Nasim Akhtar, Advocate
             For the Opposite Party-State    : Mr. P.D. Agrawal, Spl.P.P.
             For Opposite Party No.2         : Mr. Kamdeo Pandey, Advocate
                                             -----

08/08.09.2022. Heard Mr. Md. Nasim Akhtar, learned counsel for the petitioner,

Mr. P.D. Agrawal, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Kamdeo Pandey,

learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

2. This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal

proceedings including the order taking cognizance dated 18.12.2020 passed

by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro in connection with

Siyaljori P.S. Case No.39/2019, corresponding to G.R. No.309/2020, pending

in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class.

3. Mr. Md. Nasim Akhtar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the case is arising out of matrimonial dispute and the case has been

registered under Section 498A and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code.

He further submits that good relationship has been developed between the

petitioner and opposite party no.2 and now they are residing together and

both the parties have settled the dispute.

4. Mr. Kamdeo Pandey, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 accepts

the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that

now the petitioner and opposite party no.2 are residing together and the

matter has been compromised.

5. In view of the above facts and considering the submissions of the

learned counsel for the parties, and also considering that the matter has

been compromised and both the parties are residing together, it appears

that both the parties have settled their dispute. There is no societal interest

involved in this case. In light of the judgments passed by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.

reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of

Punjab & Anr., reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, it is a fit case to exercise

power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceedings

including the order taking cognizance dated 18.12.2020 passed by the

learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro in connection with Siyaljori P.S.

Case No.39/2019, corresponding to G.R. No.309/2020, pending in the court

of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class is, hereby, quashed.

6. Resultantly, this petition stands allowed and disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/