Ashish Anand v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.4386 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2673 Year- 2016 Thana -PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPATNA ===================================== Ashish Anand, Son of Sri Arjun Prasad Sahu, Resident of Village- Chhotu Shekhpura, Hisua, P.S.- Hisua, DistrictNawada. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Alka, Wife of Sri Ashish Anand and daughter of Sri Ram Pratap Prasad, Resident of Flat No.301, Satish Residency, Road No.3H, New Patliputra Colony, P.S.- Patliputra, Patna800013. .... .... Opposite Party/s ===================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, Adv. For the State :Mr. Shailendra Kumar -1, APP For the O.P. No. 2 :Mr. Patanjali Rishi, Adv. ===================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-04-2018 The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 26.09.2017, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-Cum-Sub-Judge-XV, Patna in connection with Complaint Case No. 2673-C of 2016, whereby cognizance against the petitioner has been taken under Section 312 of the Indian Penal Code.
Mr. Patanjali Rishi, learned Advocate appearing for the opposite party No. 2 has, at the very outset, submitted that there has been an agreement between the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4386 of 2018 (2) dt.10-04-2018 2/2 parties for amicably parting ways.
The case relates to matrimonial dispute and it has been decided by the parties that before they part amicably, all cases and further proceedings, emanating therefrom, ought to end as those would only be an impediment in the way of peaceful settlement of all the matrimonial disputes.
Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has, therefore, stated that the opposite party No. 2 shall have no objection if the order taking cognizance, which has been impugned in the present petition, is quashed. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in allowing the prosecution in the present case to be continued any further against the petitioner. As such, the order impugned dated 26.09.2017, is set-aside. All the proceedings arising therefrom are also quashed.
This application is, accordingly, allowed.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J) Praveen-II/- U T