Prolonged Pre-Trial Detention and Right to Liberty Cannot Be Ignored” - Punjab & Haryana High Court Emphasizes Bail as the Rule Taxation Law | Andhra Pradesh High Court Rules Hotel’s Expenditures on Carpets, Mattresses, and Lampshades are Deductible as Current Expenditures Orissa High Court Upholds Disengagement of Teacher for Unauthorized Absence and Suppression of Facts In Disciplined Forces, Transfers are an Administrative Necessity; Judicial Interference is Limited to Cases of Proven Mala Fide: Patna High Court Act Of Judge, When Free From Oblique Motive, Cannot Be Questioned: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Disciplinary Proceedings Against Additional Collector Registration Act | False Statements in Conveyance Documents Qualify for Prosecution Under Registration Act: Kerala High Court When Junior is Promoted, Senior’s Case Cannot be Deferred Unjustly: Karnataka High Court in Sealed Cover Promotion Dispute Medical Training Standards Cannot Be Lowered, Even for Disability’ in MBBS Admission Case: Delhi HC Suspicion, However Strong It May Be, Cannot Take Place Of Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Acquittal No Detention Order Can Rely on Grounds Already Quashed: High Court Sets Precedent on Preventive Detention Limits Tenant's Claims of Hardship and Landlord's Alternate Accommodations Insufficient to Prevent Eviction: Allahabad HC Further Custodial Detention May Not Be Necessary: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail in Murder Case Citing Lack of Specific Evidence High Court, As A Constitutional Court Of Record, Possesses The Inherent Power To Correct Its Own Record: Bombay High Court A Fresh Section 11 Arbitration Petition Without Liberty Granted at the Time of Withdrawal is Not Maintainable: Supreme Court; Principles of Order 23 CPC Applied Adult Sexual Predators Ought Not To Be Dealt With Leniency Or Extended Misplaced Sympathy: Sikkim High Court Retired Employee Entitled to Interest on Delayed Leave Encashment Despite Absence of Statutory Provision: Delhi HC Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Full Disability Pension and Service Element for Life to Army Veteran Taxation Law | Director Must Be Given Notice to Prove Lack of Negligence: Telangana High Court Quashes Order Against Director in Tax Recovery Case High Court of Uttarakhand Acquits Defendants in High-Profile Murder Case, Cites Lack of Evidence In Cases of Financial Distress, Imposing A Mandatory Deposit Under Negotiable Instruments Act May Jeopardize Appellant’s Right To Appeal: Rajasthan High Court Patna High Court Acquits Accused, Questions “Capacity of Victim to Make Coherent Statement” with 100% Burn Injuries High Court of Himachal Pradesh Dismisses Bail Plea in ₹200 Crore Scholarship Scam: Rajdeep Singh Case Execution of Conveyance Ends Arbitration Clause; Appeal for Arbitration Rejected: Bombay High Court

Imposed Fine of Rs. 1 Lakh On Wife - Courts Not Meant for Settling Personal Scores in Matrimonial Disputes - Quased FIR Post Mutual Divorce Settlement: MP HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Madhya Pradesh, in a significant judgement, addressed the issue of quashing FIRs and criminal proceedings in matrimonial disputes. The court dealt with petitions under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing an FIR lodged under various sections of the IPC following a mutual divorce settlement.

Facts and Issues: The petitions filed by Anshul Gupta and his parents contested the FIR lodged by respondent No. 2, Gupta's former wife, under IPC sections including 498A (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty), 323 (punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation), among others. The primary issue was the non-withdrawal of the case by respondent No. 2 despite a mutual divorce decree, where she agreed to withdraw all pending cases against the petitioners.

Abuse of Legal Process: The court highlighted the misuse of the legal process by the respondent, noting, "the criminal complaint... was filed by the wife only to harass the respondents."

No Substantiation of Section 313 IPC Charge: The allegations under Section 313 (punishment for causing miscarriage without woman's consent) were scrutinized, with the court finding no substantial evidence supporting these claims.

Deliberate Non-Withdrawal by Respondent: Justice Abhyankar observed the deliberate non-withdrawal of the case by the respondent post the mutual divorce settlement, terming it as an abuse of court's process.

Decision: The court allowed the petitions, quashing the FIR and subsequent criminal proceedings. It also imposed costs of Rs. 1 lakh on respondent No. 2 for misusing the court's process, to be paid to the petitioner.

Date of Decision: 01 March 2024.

Anshul  vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr.,

Similar News