HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 628 / 2018
Piyush Yadav S/o Shri Gajraj Singh, By Caste Yadav, Resident of
House No. 82, Behind Ganpati Nagar, Pushkar Road, Ajmer.
1. State of Rajasthan
2. Priyanka Parihar W/o Piyush, D/o Shri Utsavlal Parihar, Resident
of House No. 82, Behind Ganpat Nagar, Pushkar Road, Ajmer, At
Present C/o House of Heeraji Bauji, Behind Bholibai Temple,
Khanda Falsa Road, Jalore Gate, Jodhpur.
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Bharat Shrimali.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.Yogesh Parmar.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment / Order
The instant misc. petition has been filed seeking quashing of
the proceedings of Cr.Case No.18150/2017 pending in the court of
learned Special Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (PCPNDT
Act Cases), Jodhpur Metro for the offences under Sections 498A
IPC on the basis of the compromise.
The respondent No.2 is the first informant and the petitioner
is her husband.
The learned counsel representing the respective parties i.e.
petitioner husband and the respondent No.2 wife, submit that the
litigating spouses have mutually decided to settle down the
dispute inter-se between them. They thus, submit that the
(2 of 2)
proceedings going on in the trial court against the petitioner
should be quashed.
They submit that an application for termination of the
proceedings through a mutual compromise was filed in the Court
below. The trial Court vide order dated 29.11.2017 has accepted
the said application for the offence under Section 406 of the I.P.C.
and has compounded the proceedings to that extent. So far as the
offence under Section 498A of I.P.C. is concerned, the application
has been rejected by the trial Court on the ground that the offence
under Section 498A of I.P.C. is non-compoundable.
In this view of the matter and looking to the guidelines
issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs.
State of Punjab Anr. reported in JT 2012(9) SC-426, it is
apparent that allowing further continuance of the proceedings
going on against the petitioner in the learned trial Court cannot be
said to be expedient in the interest of justice. If the proceedings
are allowed to continue, it may result into the compromise being
Accordingly, the misc. petition is allowed and the
proceedings of the Cr. Case No.18150/2017 pending in the Court
of learned Special Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate
(PCPNDT Act Cases), Jodhpur Metro for the offence under Section
498A of the I.P.C. are hereby quashed. Stay petition is also