Court No. - 72
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20979 of 2017 Applicant :- Kumit Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Singh,Achint Ranjan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ankit Agarwal
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Ramesh Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ankit Agarwal, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 6941 of 2014 (State of U.P. Vs. Kumit Sharma) arising out of Case Crime No. 64 of 2014, under Section 354 IPC, P.S. Sector 20, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida, pending before ACJM Ist, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present dispute arises out of matrimonial discord between the brother of applicant and the opposite party no. 2
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that:-
(i) the dispute between the parties were purely civil and private in nature, arising out of matrimonial discord between the parties;
(ii) the FIR came to be lodged by the opposite party no. 2 owing to some misunderstanding and misgivings between the parties and not on account of any real occurrence as alleged;
(iii) there never was any criminal intent on part of the applicant/s nor any criminal offence as alleged had ever occurred;
(iv) there is no injury caused to any party and wholly exaggerated allegations had been made in the heat of the moment owing to estranged relationship and bruised egos;
(v) However, at present real dispute between the brother of applicant (Girish Dutt) and opposite party no.2 has been dissolved, inasmuch, the marriage between those parties has been dissolved in view of the compromise reached between them. Consequently, the ingredients of offence alleged under Sections 498-A, 406 and 34 IPC against the said Girish Dutt and other applicants has been quashed by the order of the Delhi High Court dated 14.3.2017 in Writ (Crl.) 697 of 2017. In view of such facts, it has been prayed that the present proceedings against the applicant may also be quashed.
(vi) therefore, in such changed circumstances, the opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press charges against the present applicants.
5. In fact, it is submitted that if the criminal prosecution is allowed to proceed it may create further complication in the otherwise normal relationship that is arising between the hitherto bitterly estranged couple and their families;
6. Sri Ankit Agarwal, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant. In fact counter affidavit of opposite party no. 2 has been filed clearly admitting the fact that compromise having been reached between the parties.
7. In view of the fact that the dispute appears to be purely of a personal nature being a matrimonial dispute that has been mutually settled between the parties, to their satisfaction, no useful purpose would be served in allowing such a prosecution to proceed any further.
8. Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana) as well as the Judgment of the Apex Court reported in J.T., 2008(9) SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another), the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby set aside.
9. The present application is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 29.4.2019 Meenu