Mutual consent and divorce can nullify ongoing legal proceedings regarding family disputes if the relationship has been amicably settled.

Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

The present criminal miscellaneous applications were dismissed for non-prosecution on 09.05.2025. Now, Restoration Applications (MCRC No. 4449 of 2025 and MCRC No. 1145 of 2025) have been filed by the applicants for recalling the order dated 09.05.2025. The reasons given in the restoration applications, according to this Court, are sufficient, therefore, the restoration applications are allowed. The present C-482 applications are directed to be restored to their original numbers.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties on merits and perused the records.

3. These criminal miscellaneous applications have been filed by the applicants challenging the charge-sheet dated 14.02.2015, summoning order dated 16.04.2015/09.06.2015 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, in Criminal Case No.

1069 of 2015 and the entire proceedings arising out from it.

4. Brief facts of the case are that applicant – Prateek Kaushik and respondent no. 2 – Smt. Arti Sharma got married on 20.03.2013. From the wedlock, a son was born on 25.02.2014, but, after some time, the relationship between the applicant and respondent no. 2 got estranged, due to which, they started living separately since 04.08.2017. Respondent no. 2 also filed complaint against her mother-in-law and brother-in-law, wherein, she has submitted that she was harassed by her husband and in-laws for demand of dowry. An FIR was registered by respondent no. 2, which has been registered as Case Crime No. 79 of 2014, under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 498-A of IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. After investigation, charge-sheet under Sections 323, 504, 506, 498-A IPC was filed. Investigating Officer did not find charges of harassment due to dowry and thus charges under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act were not included in the charge-sheet.

5. Against the summoning order dated 16.04.2015/09.06.2015, the applicants were summoned to face the trial. Feeling aggrieved, they preferred both the above criminal miscellaneous applications being C-482 No. 965 of 2015 and C-482 No. 860 of 2015. C-482 No. 965 of 2015 is filed against the husband and C-482 No. 860 of 2015 is filed against mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the complainant.

6. An application under Section 13 (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was filed by the applicant – Prateek Kaushik and respondent no. 2 on 14.09.2015 before the Court of Principal Judge, Udham Singh Nagar and after the mandatory cooling- off period of six months, decree of divorce under Section 13 (b) was granted by judgment and order dated 16.05.2016. In the judgment, settlement was arrived at between the applicant – Prateek Kaushik and respondent no. 2 that they would withdraw all the cases pending against them and they would not file any case regarding maintenance and custody of the child before any Court.

7. Learned counsel for the applicants have submitted that now since both husband and wife have been mutually divorced and they are living separately, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served if the proceedings of the case are allowed to continue against the applicants. Learned counsel has further submitted that complaint was filed when the relationship between applicant – Prateek Kaushik and respondent no. 2 – Smt. Arti Sharma were estranged. Thereafter, they agreed for a mutual divorce and decree of divorce under Section 13 (b) was granted to them by judgment and order dated 16.05.2016.

8. Accordingly, the present criminal misc. applications are allowed.

9. The charge-sheet dated 14.02.2015, summoning orders dated 16.04.2015/09.06.2015 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1069 of 2015, State Vs. Prateek