1 2025:CGHC:37561-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 3291 of 2024 Dr. Ishwar Dayal Chaurasia S/o Late Baijnath Chaurasia Aged About 65 Years R/o E - 13/45 Bunglow, T.T. Nagar, Bhopal (M.P.). ... Petitioner versus 1 - The State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Mahila Police Station, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Dr. (Smt.) Tanya W/o Dr. Ishant Chaurasia Aged About 32 Years R/o Medi Health Hospital, Kukurbeda, Amanaka, Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate For State/Respondent No.1 : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Nikhil Wadhwani, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 31.07. 2025 1. Heard Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Soumya Rai, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondent No.1 and Mr. Nikhil Wadhwani, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2. ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2025.08.04 14:33:47 +0530 2 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following relief(s):- “I. To kindly quash the F.I.R. dated 30.09.2021 bearing No. 85/2021 registerd in the Mahila Thana, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) against the petitioner. II. To kindly quash impugned Final Report No. 107/2022 dated 19.08.2022 filed against the petitioner U/s 498A, 294, 34 & 377 IPC in Crime No. 85/2021. (Annexure P/1). III. To kindly quash the impugned order dated 10.01.2023 (Annexure P/2), whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur has taken cognizance of the impugned charge-sheet and registered the impugned criminal proceeding as Criminal case No. 232 of 2023 against the petitioner.” 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations raised against the petitioner are false and fabricated and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case, no offence has been committed by him. He further submits that the petitioner is the father-in-law of the private respondent No.2 and after marriage of his son, the private respondent No. 2 and her husband were living separately in a rented house and thereafter, some matrimonial dispute arose between the parties and the petitioner has also been made an accused in the present case along with husband and mother-in-law of respondent No.2. It is contended that the petitioner had never lived in domestic relationship with the complainant as such no question arises for his having been found involved in the commission of the said offenes as has been levelled by the complainant with deliberation. 3 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the decree of divorce between respondent No.2 and the petitioner's son, namely Ishant Chourasia, has already been passed on 16.06.2025 by the Court of learned First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur (C.G.). It is contended that the decree of divorce specifically disallows the continuance of the matrimonial relationship between the parties, and a copy of the said decree has been annexed with the covering memo dated 30.07.2025. In light of this development, it is submitted that the continuance of the present proceedings against the petitioner would be an abuse of process of law and, therefore, the same deserves to be quashed. 5. It is further submitted that proceedings against the husband and mother-in-law of respondent No.2 are pending before the concerned trial Court, and they propose to file an appropriate application for compounding of the offence. If such an application is filed, the trial Court may be directed to consider and decide the same in accordance with law. Insofar as the present petitioner is concerned, he may also be permitted to file an appropriate application before the trial Court seeking compounding of the offence, if he so desires, and the trial Court may be directed to consider the said application as per law. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 concurs the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner. 4 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the present case. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, particularly taking note of the fact that the decree of divorce has been passed on 16.06.2025 by the learned First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur (C.G.), thereby severing the matrimonial ties between private respondent No.2 and the petitioner's son, and also considering the submission that the petitioner proposes to move an application for compounding of the offence before the concerned trial Court, this Court is of the considered view that no further indulgence is required at this stage. 9. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the concerned trial Court seeking compounding of the offence, if so advised. In the event such an application is filed, the trial Court shall consider and decide the same on its own merits and in accordance with law, without being influenced by any observations made in this order. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu