Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
A.S. Naidu, J.
TANKADHAR THAKUR AND OTHERS - APPELLANT
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA AND ANOTHER - RESPONDENT
Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 259 of 2003
Decided On : 02-09-2003
Inherent Jurisdiction - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings - Matrimonial Dispute
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed a Criminal Misc. Case invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the court to quash the order passed by the lower court, which had taken cognizance of offences under the Indian Penal Code and the Dowry Prohibition Act against the accused persons.
Finding of the Court:
The court considered the affidavit filed by the informant, stating that the dispute had been amicably settled and the husband and wife were leading a blissful married life. Citing the decision in the case of B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, the court concluded that the continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law and quashed the proceedings of the case pending before the lower court.
Issues: The main issue was whether the court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings arising from a matrimonial dispute, considering the amicable settlement between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principle that in cases of matrimonial disputes where the parties have settled their differences and are leading a peaceful married life, the continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law.
Final Decision: The Criminal Misc. Case was disposed of, and the proceedings of the case pending before the lower court were quashed.
JUDGMENT :
A.S. Naidu, J. - Heard Learned Counsel for the Petitioners, Learned Counsel for the informant and the Learned Counsel for the State.
2. The Criminal Misc. Case has been filed invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order dated 15-4-2003 passed by the S.D.J.M., Bhawanipatna in G.R. Case No. 119 of 2002. By the impugned order the Court below has taken cognizance of offences u/s 498-A/34 Indian Penal Code and u/s 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act alleged against the accused persons.
3. The informant has appeared through advocate and filed an affidavit inter alia stating that the dispute among her and the accused persons has been amicably settled and both the husband and wife are now leading a blissful married life. It is further submitted that continuance of the G.R. Case against the accused persons would course a dent in their peaceful married life. Considering the submissions made and also in the light of the decision in the case of B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, reported in (2003) 25 OCR (SC) 99, and either decisions of this Court feel that continuance of the G.R. Case at this juncture of time would not be beneficial to either party. In view of the fact that the G.R. Case arises out of a matrimonial dispute and both the husband and wife have ironed their differences and are leading a blissful conjugal life, continuance of the criminal proceeding would be an abuse of the process of law, I therefore quash the proceedings of G.R. Case No. 116 of 2002 pending before the S.D.J.M. Bhawanipatna.
4. The Criminal Misc. Case is disposed of.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
