VINAYKANTH NARENDER JOSHI Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner invokes the inherent powers of this Court vested under Section 482 Cr.PC and seek for quashing of proceedings on the ground that the matter ended in compromise, and police referred the case as "action dropped', and suppressing the same they filed charge sheet. It is also contended that subsequently there was divorce in between the parties. The learned Public Prosecutor contends that it is not a fit case to exercise inherent powers of this Court. The 2nd respondent did not dispute any of the facts.

(2.) Adverting to the same, it is clear that a referral notice was served by police on petitioner stating that 'action dropped' as he represented compromise before the police. When the police referred the matter as "action dropped", it was not known how the charge sheet was filed subsequently by suppressing the said fact. It is not open to police to file charge sheet when they serve a notice stating that "action dropped", unless they withdraw the notice. Such a thing has not been done in this case. Moreover, when the parties entered into compromise, there is no need to proceed further with the case, when it is at crime stage. I find that miscarriage of justice occurred in the case.

(3.) In the result, the impugned proceedings are quashed. The petition is allowed accordingly.