Rajnish vs State Of Uttarakhand & Anr.

Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J. (oral)

By means of the present criminal misc. application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant has sought quashing of the impugned charge-sheet dated 12.01.2014, summoning order dated 25.03.2014 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.231 of 2014 (Case Crime No.316 of 2013) under Sections 452, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali Gangnahar Roorkee, District Haridwar, pending before the court of ACJ (S.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar.

The instant case has its roots in an FIR which was lodged by respondent No.2 with the allegations that on 24.11.2013, at about 3:00 PM, the applicant and his father entered the house of the complainant and abused the complainant and assaulted him. On raising hue and cry, Kuldeep and Kanhaiya saved the complainant and it is alleged that after the said incident, the applicant was caught by the complainant and his companions, and the father of the applicant fled from the spot.

On the basis of the aforesaid FIR, the Investigating Officer submitted a charge sheet against the applicant. On the basis of the charge sheet, the trial court has summoned the applicant to face trial vide summoning order dated 25.03.2014.

Seeking quashing of the aforesaid charge sheet, summoning order and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 231 of 2014, learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the complainant/respondent No.2 is the brother-in-law (Sadu) of the applicant and the instant FIR has been lodged for creating pressure on the applicant due to a matrimonial dispute between the applicant and his wife, namely Gita Dhiman, who is the real sister of wife of the complainant.

Matrimonial dispute arose between the applicant and his wife Gita Dhiman, due to which she had also lodged an FIR against the applicant and his family members, inter-alia under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Kotwali Gangnahar Roorkee, District Haridwar.

During course of investigation of the aforesaid FIR lodged by Gita Dhiman, she moved an application before the SSP, Haridwar, in which it is stated that the matter between the parties has been settled amicably, and she has received Rs.3,50,000/- from the applicant. It is further stated that on the basis of the mutual consent, a divorce petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act has been filed.

It is further the case of the applicant that on the basis of compromise between the parties, a petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act for seeking divorce on mutual consent was filed on 21.02.2014. In the said petition, it was agreed that all the cases between the parties would be withdrawn. However, in spite of the knowledge of the aforesaid compromise between the parties, the I.O. submitted the charge sheet against the applicant in the instant case.

It is further the case of the applicant that since the matrimonial dispute has already been settled amicably and the sister-in-law of respondent No.2 has received permanent alimony, and further petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act has already been filed by the parties in which the instant case was agreed to be withdrawn, therefore, continuation of the instant criminal proceedings against the applicant is nothing but an abuse of process of law.

During the course of the hearing, the learned counsel for the applicant has placed a judgment dated 23.07.2026 passed by this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 1751 of 2014, “State vs. Rajnish and Others”, by means of which the charge sheet, summoning order dated 09.04.2014 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.1620 of 2014 (New No. 1751 of 2014), State vs. Rajnish and Others, under Section 498A, 323, 504 & 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali, Gangnahar Roorkee, District Haridwar, pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) / Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar have been quashed.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that since the main dispute was in between the applicant and his wife Gita, however, at the behest of the wife, her brother-in-law Hariom Arora, who is the complainant/respondent No.2 in this case, has lodged the FIR from which the present case emanates.

Learned counsel for the applicant has also placed on record a photocopy of the affidavit on behalf of Hariom Arora, sworn on 18.02.2014, in which he has stated that on 24.11.2013, there was some altercation and a big crowd gathered and in the altercation, respondent No.2 fell down and sustained some injuries. Rajnish did not commit any maar-peet with him, and due to some misunderstanding, he included the name of Rajnish and his father Mahendra Dhiman. Copy of the said affidavit is taken on record.

Since the instant case is an offshoot of the matrimonial dispute between the applicant and his wife Gita and respondent No.2 is the brother-in-law of the wife of the applicant, and in the main proceedings under Section 498A, 323, 504 & 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, the case has been quashed by this Court by virtue of judgment and order dated 23.07.2026 rendered in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 1751 of 2014, “State vs. Rajnish and Others”, hence the learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the proceedings of criminal case also deserves to be quashed in the present case.

Learned State counsel would submit that in the present case, in pursuance of the FIR, due investigation was conducted and the same culminated in the filing of the charge sheet, and on the basis of the same, a summoning order has been passed.

He would further submit that the charge sheet has been filed on the basis of evidence collected by the I.O. during investigation and on the basis of the same, summoning order has been passed and as such, there is no scope for interference. However, with respect to the order dated 23.07.2026, he does not dispute that the order dated 23.07.2026 has been passed, from which it is clear that the main case lodged at the behest of the wife has already been quashed in the aforesaid criminal proceedings.

In such circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by letting the matter to go for trial inasmuch as the main dispute between the husband and the wife already has been put to rest and also in view of the affidavit of Hariom Arora, it is apparent that he is not interested to pursue the matter any further.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present criminal misc. application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. deserves to be allowed.

Consequently, the impugned charge-sheet dated 12.01.2014, summoning order dated 25.03.2014 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.231 of 2014 (Case Crime No.316 of 2013) under Sections 452, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali Gangnahar Roorkee, District Haridwar, pending before the court of ACJ (S.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar, are hereby quashed.

The present criminal misc. application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, allowed.