SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Prem Kumar And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 21 January, 2020

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 28

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 6556 of 2013

Applicant :- Prem Kumar And Others

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- R.S. Chaudhary

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Shiv Shankar Sachan

Hon’ble Rajeev Misra,J.

Order on Delay Condonation Application

1. Heard Sri R.S. Chaudhary, learned counsel for applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate representing opposite party no.1 and Sri Yogesh Kumar Bais, learned counsel representing opposite party no.2.

2. Cause shown is sufficient. Delay in filing restoration application is condoned. Accordingly, the delay condonaion application is allowed.

3. Delay Condoned.

Order Date :- 21.1.2020

Prajapati

——

Court No. – 28

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 6556 of 2013

Applicant :- Prem Kumar And Others

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- R.S. Chaudhary

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Shiv Shankar Sachan

Hon’ble Rajeev Misra,J.

Order on Restoration Application

1. Heard Sri R.S. Chaudhary, learned counsel for applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate representing opposite party no.1 and Sri Yogesh Kumar Bais, learned counsel representing opposite party no.2

2. This application has been filed for seeking recall of order dated 30.01.2018 passed by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash-VII, whereby the above-mentioned application was dismissed for want of prosecution and interim order was also vacated.

3. Cause shown is sufficient. Accordingly, application is allowed. The order dated 30.01.2018 is hereby recalled. The application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. is restored to its original number and status.

Order Date :- 21.1.2020

Prajapati

Court No. – 28

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 6556 of 2013

Applicant :- Prem Kumar And Others

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- R.S. Chaudhary

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Shiv Shankar Sachan

Hon’ble Rajeev Misra,J.

Order on Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C.

1. After recalling the order dated 30.01.2018, this Court has proceeded to hear and decide this application on merits.

2. Heard Sri R.S. Chaudhary, learned counsel for applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate representing opposite party no.1 and Sri Yogesh Kumar Bais, learned counsel representing opposite party no.2.

3. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging chargesheet dated 20.04.2012 submitted in Case Crime No.111 of 2012 (State Vs. Prem Kumar Soni and others), under Section 498-A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar Banda, District Banda.

4. It transpires from record that marriage of applicant no.1-Prem Kumar Soni was solemnized with opposite party no. 2 Parul Soni, on 11.02.2008 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs. Subsequently, relationship between applicant no.1 and opposite party no.2 became strained on account of marital discord.

5. On account of cruelty alleged to have been committed upon opposite party no.2, lodged a first information report against applicant no.1 and others on 5.3.2012, which was registered as Case Crime No. 111 of 2012, under Section 498-A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar Banda, District Banda. The police upon completion of statutory investigation in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C. submitted charge-sheet on 20.04.2012 against all the named accused.

6. Upon submission of aforesaid charge-sheet, Chief Judicial Magistrate, vide cognizance taking order dated 18.08.2012 took cognizance. As a result of aforesaid, Criminal Case No. 1353/XI of 2012 (State Vs. Prem Kumar Soni and others), under Section 498-A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar Banda, District Banda, came to be registered. Thus, feeling aggrieved, applicants have now approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

7. Learned counsel for applicants submits that present application was dismissed in default vide order dated 30.01.2018. Thereafter parties have amicably settled the dispute outside the Court. In view of settlement arrived at between the parties, they resolved to file a divorce suit by mutual consent as provided under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, which came to be registered as Marriage Petition No. 601 of 2018 (Smt. Parul Soni Vs. Prem Kumar), in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Jalaun at Orai.

8. Para-6 of the Divorce Petition clearly contemplates that the parties have resolved the dispute and litigation initiated by the parties against each other shall also be got decided in terms of compromise. Ultimately aforesaid suit has been decreed vide judgment and decree dated 13.07.2019.

9. On the aforesaid factual premise, learned counsel for applicants submits that since dispute between parties is a private dispute and parties have amicably settled the dispute outside the Court, therefore, interest of justice would be better served in case proceedings of above-mentioned case are quashed by this Court.

10. Learned Additional Government Advocate representing opposite party no.1 does not dispute the aforesaid facts. In support of applicants, he also submits that since the dispute between parties is a private dispute, and has been settled through compromise outside the Court, therefore, interest of justice of justice would be better served in case proceedings of afore-mentioned case are directed to be quashed by this Court.

11. This Court is not unmindful of the judgments of the Apex Court in the cases of :

1. B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003)4 SCC 675.

2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation[2008)9 SCC 677].

3. Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others ( 2008) 16 SCC 1.

4. Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303.

5. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab ( 2014) 6 SCC 466.

12. Having heard counsel for parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of above mentioned case pending before Court below. Since parties have entered into a compromise and settled their dispute amicably outside the Court, in view of law laid down by Apex Court in the case of Shlok Bhardwaj Vs. Runika Bhardwaj and others [2015 (2) SCC 721], it is desirable in the interest of justice that the proceedings of case pending before Court below are quashed.

13. Accordingly, present application succeeds and is allowed. The proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1353/XI of 2012 (State Vs. Prem Kumar Soni and others), arising out of Case Crime No.111 of 2012 (State Vs. Prem Kumar Soni and others), under Section 498-A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar Banda, District Banda, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banda, are hereby quashed.

14. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

15. Learned counsel for applicants submits that pursuant to interim order dated 1.3.2013, applicants had deposited sum of Rs.15,000/- with the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad. After deposit of aforesaid amount, mediation centre of this Court fixed dates for appearance of parties but opposite party no.2 did not appear even on a single date. The order dated 1.3.2013 itself provides that 70% of the deposited amount shall be payable to opposite party no.2, therefore, applicants are entitled for refund of 70% amount deposited pursuant to order dated 1.3.2013.

16. Let 70% amount of deposited amount (deposited amount Rs.15000) be returned to the applicants within two weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

Order Date :- 21.1.2020

Prajapati

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation