DV case NOT to continue when original RCR case compromised and dismissed ! Rajasthan HC

  • Original RCR case is dismissed ( compromised between parties).
  • So magistrate strikes off names of parties in a DV case.
  • However the Sessions court strikes down that order (of magistrate !! ) .. so parties run to HC.
  • Hon HC orders that once the original RCR case is dismissed based on a compromise between parties then the DV case has no reason to continue !!

====================================

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR

ORDER IN
S.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No.4990/2015
(With Stay Application No.4697/2015)

1. Vishnu Dutt Goyal son of Shri Govind Prasad Goyal,
resident of Friends Colony, Alwar C/o Bajaj Bazar, Near Tripolia Temple, Alwar

2. Dr. Madan Mohan Gupta son of late Ramswaroop Marjiya,
resident of Kiran Palace, Near Oswal Chungi Naka, Gangapurcity, District Sawaimadhopur (Rajasthan)

…Petitioners

Versus

Smt. Kalpana Gupta @ Mamta Daughter of Late Shri Vishnu Chand Gupta, wife of Gaurav Agrawal,
by caste Mahajan, resident of A-207, 80 feet Road, Mahesh Nagar, Jaipur

…Respondent

Date of Order ::: 20.09.2016

Present
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq

Mr. Rajneesh Gupta, counsel for petitioners
Mr. Shashi Bhushan Gupta, counsel for respondent
http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; https://twitter.com/ATMwithDick


By the Court:-

This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by petitioners challenging order dated 14.08.2015 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No.10, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur, in Criminal Appeal No.234/2015, by which he set aside order dated 07.04.2015 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge-cum-Metropolitan Magistrate No.19, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur, in Case No.297/2014, by which learned trial court allowed the application filed by petitioners and ordered to strike out the names of petitioners from the array of non-applicants in the proceedings under Section 12 of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005, initiated at the instance of the respondent against her husband Gaurav Agrawal. The petitioners happen to be the husband of sister of Gaurav Agrawal.

Learned counsel for the respondent has produced for perusal of the court the order dated 12.12.2015 passed in the Lok Adalat attached to the courts at Hindauncity, and submitted that the matter has been compromised between the parties before the Family Court, where the application filed by the husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been dismissed on the basis of the compromise.

If that be so, there is no reason why the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act continue.

In that view of the matter, the order dated 14.08.2015 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No.10, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur, in Criminal Appeal No.234/2015, is set aside and the order dated 07.04.2015 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge-cum-Metropolitan Magistrate No.19, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur, in Case No.297/2014, is restored.

Criminal miscellaneous petition is accordingly allowed in view of the compromise between the parties. This also disposes of the stay application. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; https://twitter.com/ATMwithDick

(Mohammad Rafiq) J.

//Jaiman//94

*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.


CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE with necessary Emphasis, Re formatting


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s