SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Balkishan Sharma S/O Shri Gheesa … vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 18 December, 2018


S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6289/2018

Balkishan Sharma S/o Shri Gheesa Lal Sharma, Aged About 49
Years, R/o 173-A Taro Ke Koot Tonk Road Jaipur Raj.
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp, Raj.
2. Smt. Chandra Lata Sharma W/o Shri Balkishan Sharma
D/o Natthi Lal Shrma, Aged About 42 Years, R/o 1-H-8
New Housing Board Colony Near Stc School Bharatpur At
Present R/o 173-A Taro Ke Koot Tonk Road Jaipur Raj.

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Munesh Bhardwaj
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Aladeen Khan PP
Mr. Brijesh Kumar Bhardwaj for
respondent no.2




The present petition has been filed under Section 482
Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings arising out of FIR
No.115/2012 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, Bharatpur
for the offences under Sections 498A and 406 IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that
on 8.2.1996 the petitioner Balkishan Sharma was married with
respondent no.2 Smt. Chandra Lata Sharma as per Hindu customs
and rites. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that
during subsistence of marriage on 20.2.1998, petitioner and
respondent no.2 were blessed with one son, however, later
differences arose and the complainant/respondent no.2 was
compelled to lodge the impugned FIR.

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-6289/2018]

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that
now the better sense has prevailed and parties in order to save
marriage have started cohabiting together as husband and wife.

Balkishan Sharma petitioner is present in the court and
he has been identified by his counsel Mr. Munesh Bhardwaj. Smt.
Chandra Lata Sharma, respondent no.2 is also present in the
court. She has been identified by her counsel Mr. Brijesh Kumar

Smt. Chandra Lata Sharma, respondent no.2 has stated
that she is living happily now as wife of petitioner and therefore,
FIR lodged by her be quashed, as she no longer intends to pursue
the same.

Learned counsel for the parties have submitted that a
joint application for compromise (Annexure-4) was filed before the
trial court. It is further contended that the trial court accepted the
said compromise qua offence under Section 406 IPC but rejected
the same qua offence under Section 498A IPC.

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



Powered by TCPDF (

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation