AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
Accordingly, these petitions stand allowed and disposed of.
Consequently, I.A. No.9679 of 2022 and I.A. No.9680 of 2022 stand disposed of.
Interim order, if any granted by this Court, stands vacated.