SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Manish Kejriwal S/O Shri Banwari … vs State Of Rajasthan on 27 November, 2018

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7200/2018

Manish Kejriwal S/o Shri Banwari Lal Kejriwal B/c Agarwal, Aged
About 36 Years, R/o C-305, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur.
—-Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.
2. Smt. Himani Sharma D/o Rajendra Prasad Sharma, W/o
Shri Manish Kejriwal B/c Brahman, Aged About 32 Years,
R/o 32, Gyan Vihar, Model Town, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur.
—-Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahipal Kharra
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Meenakshi Pareek PP
Mr. P.L. Hissaria for respondent no.2

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

-/Order/-

27/11/2018

The present petition has been filed under Section 482

Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.173/2014 registered at Police

Station Mahila Thana, Jaipur City (East) for the offences under

Sections 498A, 406 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

In the present case, quashing of FIR has been sought

on the basis of compromise.

Smt. Himani Sharma, respondent no.2 is present in the

court. She has been identified by her counsel Mr. P.L. Hissaria. Mr.

Manish Kejriwal petitioner is also present in the court and he has

been identified by his counsel Mr. Mahipal Kharra.

Smt. Himani Sharma, respondent no.2 has stated that

on 12.2.2009 she was married with petitioner as per Hindu
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-7200/2018]

customs and rites. It is submitted that due to difference of

opinion, she was compelled to lodge the impugned FIR.

Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 has submitted

that due to intervention of respectables, elders of the family and

common relations, the matrimonial dispute has been amicably

resolved.

Smt. Himani Sharma, respondent no.2 has stated that

the petitioner Manish Kejriwal has agreed to pay Rs.15 Lakhs

towards Stridhan, expenses on marriage, permanent alimony and

cost of litigation etc.

Learned counsel for the parties have drawn attention of

this Court to the compromise Annexure-2 presented before the

trial court. The trial court vide order dated 3..1.2018 accepted the

said compromise for the offences under Sections 406 IPC and

acquitted petitioner qua said offence as the same is

compoundable, however, the trial court rejected the said

compromise qua offences under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of

Dowry Prohibition Act on the ground that the said offences are

non-compoundable.

Petitioner and respondent no.2 have jointly submitted

that they shall remain bound by compromise Annexure-2 affected

between the parties.

Smt. Himani Sharma, respondent no.2 has submitted

that she has received in all Rs.15 Lakhs paid by petitioner. She

has submitted that the divorce petition under Section 13B of

Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by way of mutual

consent is pending in the Family Court No.2, Jaipur.

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-7200/2018]

Smt. Himani Sharma, complainant/respondent no.2 has

prayed that the impugned FIR be quashed as she no longer

intends to pursue the same.

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/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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