Category Archives: 498a woman remarried and settled. quash 498a

Smart NRI does NOT return 2 India aftr 498a. Gets case quashed aftr divorce &wife’s remarriage! GujHC

“…It appears that although charge-sheet was filed, yet the applicant could not be tried as he is still in U.K. On the other hand, the other co-accused came to be tried by the Court below and were acquitted of all the charges. I am told that against such order of acquittal the State preferred an acquittal appeal, which also came to be dismissed. Mr. Ansari has brought to my notice that the respondent No.2 had filed a petition for divorce in the Court of the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Rajkot and the Court has passed a decree to dissolve the marriage. ….”

Finally the court quashes this 498A also !!

*****************************************************************

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 14056 of 2014

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
**********************************************************
VIMALKUMAR RAJNIKANT THAKKAR….Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1….Respondent(s)
**********************************************************
Appearance:
MR AFTABHUSEN ANSARI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
**********************************************************

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA

Date : 30/10/2015

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. By this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-original accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this Court praying for quashing of the first information report registered as C.R. No.I- 306 of 2008 with the City Police Station, Vadodara for the offence punishable under sections 498A, 406, 420, 504, 506(2) read with 114 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. The respondent No.2, original first informant, although served with the notice of rule issued by this Court, has chosen not to appear and oppose this petition either in person or through an advocate.

3. On 5th November, 2014, the following order was passed by this Court;

“Mr. Ansari, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner – original accused, submits that the marriage of the applicant was solemnized on 14.12.2007 with the respondent No.2 at Rajkot. Thereafter, on 31.12.2007, the applicant left for U.K. In the year 2008, the respondent No.2 joined the applicant herein at U.K. Thereafter, the respondent No.2 came back to India and lodged the first information report against the applicant herein and his parents.

It appears that although charge-sheet was filed, yet the applicant could not be tried as he is still in U.K. On the other hand, the other co-accused came to be tried by the Court below and were acquitted of all the charges. I am told that against such order of acquittal the State preferred an acquittal appeal, which also came to be dismissed. Mr. Ansari has brought to my notice that the respondent No.2 had filed a petition for divorce in the Court of the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Rajkot and the Court has passed a decree to dissolve the marriage. According to Mr. Ansari, in wake of all these developments, probably the respondent No.2 may not be interested to pursue further with the complaint so far as the applicant is concerned.

Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 27.11.2014. Mr. Shah, the learned APP waives service of notice for and on behalf of the State of Gujarat. The respondent No.2 be served directly through the Investigating Officer of the concerned Police Station. Direct service permitted.”

4. It appears that all other family members of the husband were tried and acquitted by the trial court. The State of Gujarat preferred an acquittal appeal which was also ordered to be dismissed by this Court. I am told that the marriage has also been dissolved by a decree passed by the Civil Court. I am told that the respondent No.2 has got married with another person. This is probably the reason why she is now not interested in the matter. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

5. Even otherwise, none of the ingredients to constitute the offence of cruelty punishable under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code are spelt out. The marriage was solemnized on 14th December, 2007. On 31st December, 2007, the applicant left for U.K. In the year 2008, the respondent No.2 joined the applicant at U.K. and on 24th December, 2008, the first information report was lodged. There is hardly any period which they spent as husband and wife. The case seems to be one of marital maladjustment.

6. In the result, this application is allowed. The further proceedings of the first information report registered as C.R. No.I-306 of 2008 with the City Police Station, Vadodara are hereby ordered to be quashed. Rule is made absolute accordingly.

Direct service is permitted.

(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.)

Vahid

*****************************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
*******************************************************************************

Woman settles 498a, divorces & remarries. Still Does NOT appear for quash. Guj HC quashes 498a

In a crisp and clear order, the Honourable Gujarat HC summarises the case thus “…a settlement was arrived at between the parties. The marriage was dissolved and the father-in-law and the mother-in-law came to be acquitted in the trial. I am told that the first informant has got married with another person and has settled in life. Perhaps, that is the reason she has chosen not to remain present before this Court…..
……. Since the settlement has been arrived at and the marriage was also dissolved and the other co-accused have also been acquitted by the trial Court, no useful purpose would be served …….”

498a 504 etc case quashed

*********************************************************

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION
(FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 4130 of 2015

**********************************************************
SOHAM BHARATBHAI BRAHMBHATT….Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1….Respondent(s)
**********************************************************
Appearance:
C S SHUKLA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR SM SHUKLA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR J.K. SHAH, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
**********************************************************

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA

Date : 24/11/2015

ORAL ORDER

Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. J.K. Shah, the learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1. The respondent No.2 – original first informant, although served with the notice issued by this Court, has chosen not to remain present and oppose this application either in person or through an advocate.

By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-husband seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying for quashing of the First Information Report lodged with the Satellite Police Station, being C.R No. I-772/07 for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 504 and 506(2) read with Section 114 of the IPC.

It appears from the materials on record that the applicant herein is settled at Canada. The other co-accused named in the FIR i.e. the father-in-law and the mother- in-law were charge-sheeted and were put to trial. In the interregnum period, a settlement was arrived at between the parties. The marriage was dissolved and the father-in-law and the mother-in-law came to be acquitted in the trial. I am told that the first informant has got married with another person and has settled in life. Perhaps, that is the reason she has chosen not to remain present before this Court.

Since the settlement has been arrived at and the marriage was also dissolved and the other co-accused have also been acquitted by the trial Court, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the prosecution so far as the applicant is concerned</B>. In the result, this application is allowed. The FIR No. I-772/07 for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 504 and 506(2) read with Section 114 of the IPC is quashed. Rule is made absolute. Direct service permitted.

(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.)

Mohandas