AMRUDDIN ANSARI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Sudhansu Kumar Deo, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agrawal, learned counsel for the State ad Mr. Shahid Yunus, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

(2.) This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the First Information Report in connection with Madhupur P.S. Case No.411 of 2015, dtd. 2/11/2015, corresponding to G.R. Case No.1004/2015, and also for quashing the order taking cognizance dtd. 31/8/2017, pending in the court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Madhupur.

(3.) Mr. Sudhansu Kumar Deo, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 3 are the husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law of opposite party no.2. He further submits that this case is arising out of matrimonial dispute and remedy of anticipatory bail was being availed and the matter was referred to the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) at Deoghar wherein both the parties have compromised the case. He also submits that joint compromise petition was filed in the anticipatory bail petition before the court below showing the terms and conditions of the settlement. He further submits that this fact has been brought before the learned court, however cognizance has been taken against the petitioners.