Anil Gupta And Others vs State Of Jharkhand And Others

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J

Heard Mr. A.K. Kashyap, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Parth Jalan, learned counsel for respondent no.2.

This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings of the FIR in connection with Taljhari P.S. Case No.40/2022 registered under Section 341, 323, 307, 364, 511, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate at Dumka.

Mr. A.K. Kashyap, learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the wife of respondent no.2, namely, Vasudha Gupta has lodged FIR being Ranibagh P.S. Case No.14/2021 in Delhi under Section 498A and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code against respondent no.2 and his family members, which was settled later on. He further submits that in the present case, the allegations are made that the petitioners, who happened to be father-in-law and brother-in-law of respondent no.2 respectively, hatched conspiracy against respondent no.2 and apart from that, there is nothing against the petitioners. He submits that now good sense has prevailed between the parties and compromised has already taken place. He also submits that after notice, the learned counsel has appeared on behalf of respondent no.2. He draws attention of the Court to Annexure-3 of the petition which is the settlement/compromise between Vasudha Gupta and Amit Vikram Awasthi. He submits that in view of the terms and conditions, the mutual divorce has already been granted vide order dated 15.05.2023. He submits that the said terms and conditions is also there, wherein, it has been disclosed that the case filed against the petitioners shall be withdrawn by respondent no.2 and another case being Ranibagh P.S. Case No.14/2021 filed in Delhi by the daughter of petitioner no.1 against respondent no.2 and his family members shall also be withdrawn.

Mr. Parth Jalan, learned counsel for respondent no.2 accepts the submission of Mr. Kashyap, learned senior counsel for the petitioners and he submits that the divorce has already been granted and in terms of the compromise, respondent no.2 is not willing to proceed with the matter.

Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the State submits that it appears that the compromise is there and this Court may pass any appropriate order.

In view of the above submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the terms and conditions of the compromise, contained in Annexure-3 of the petition, it appears that the divorce has already been granted, as submitted by the learned counsel for the parties and the terms and conditions are there of withdrawal of two cases filed by either side and further there is no societal interest involved in the present case and also considering the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and in Narinder Singh & others v. State of Punjab & another, reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, the entire criminal proceedings of the FIR in connection with Taljhari P.S. Case No.40/2022, pending in the Court of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate at Dumka is quashed.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed and disposed of.

Interim order, if any granted by this Court, stands vacated.