Smt Neelam Tiwari And Anr vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 15 December, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misccellaneous (Petition) No. 6431 / 2017
1. Smt. Neelam Tiwari W/o Shri Dheeraj Sharma, D/o Shri
Ramavatar Tiwari B/c Brahmin, Aged About 31 Years, R/o House
No.36, Jagdish Colony, Mahesh Nagar, Jaipur, Tehsil Sanganer,
District Jaipur, Raj.

2. Dheeraj Sharma S/o Shri Ambika Prasad Sharma B/c Brahmin,
Aged About 34 Years, R/o House No.20, Dayal Nagar, Gopalpura
Bye Pass, Jaipur, Tehsil Jaipur, District Jaipur, Raj.
—-Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan Through PP.
—-Respondent

__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nalin G. Narain
For Respondent(s) : Mr. NS Dhakad PP
__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
Order
15/12/2017

A joint petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been
filed by a couple who have parted company by way of divorce.

In the present petition, it has been prayed that since
the dispute has been amicably resolved due to intervention of
respectables, the impugned FIR lodged by the petitioner no.1
against the petitioner no.2 husband, and his family members be
quashed.

Petitioner No.1 Smt. Neelam Tiwari on 19.2.2011 was
married with the petitioner no.2 as per Hindu customs and rites.
During subsistence of marriage, differences arose and impugned
FIR was lodged. It is pleaded in the present petition that
subsequently, better sense prevailed between the parties and they
decided to bury the hatchet to promote ever lasting peace, amity
and harmony.

It is contended that the compromise was presented
(2 of 2)
[CRLMP-6431/2017]

before the trial court and the said trial court on 15.11.2017
accepted the compromise qua offence under
Section 406 IPC as
the same is compoundable, however, rejected the compromise qua
offence under
Section 498A IPC on the ground that the said
offence is non-compoundable.

Mr. Nalin G. Narain counsel for the petitioners has
identified Smt. Neelam Tiwari, who is present in the court.

Smt. Neelam Tiwari, the petitioner no.1 has stated that
her Stridhan and jewellery have been returned to her and since
divorce has been granted, she is no longer intended to pursue the
impugned FIR.

The learned counsel for the parties have jointly relied
upon
B.S. Joshi Ors. vs. State of Haryana Anr., 2003
Cri.L.J. 2028, to contend that this Court while exercising
jurisdiction under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. in furtherance of interest of
justice in matrimonial dispute may bring families at peace by
quashing FIR.

On the prayer made by the learned counsel for the
parties, in view of the judgment in the case of B.S. Joshi (supra),
relied by the parties, the present petition is accepted and
impugned FIR along with all its subsequent proceedings is
quashed.

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA)J.

Mak/-

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *