Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

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.,

Latest Legal News